Mafia 88- Return to New Catania- Game Over!

[Ectomancer]

Oddly enough, I agree with BM. GC undermined his own argument in the process of writing it.

Yeah, but is that actually scummy?

The flaw in his reasoning could have been an honest mistake, but there's also a good possibility it wasn't (its very easy for scum to jump on a standard anti town tell such as voting no lynch), and its light years better than a random vote. The random voting stage does exactly zero for forward momentum.

Nobody agrees with BM. That certainly can only be motivated by a desire to buddy up with him.

vote OhGodMyLife

I dont think being a good debater (or a poor one) is indicative of alignment. I'm also not content that the player that questions a page 1 no lynch or self vote is more inclined to be scum or town. Where is your conversation if everyone ignores the player that is attempting to get it started?
His join date is November 2008 though...are you really truly thinking nub scum or are you stirring the pot? He didn't really sound like a true nub to me.

[Ectomancer]

Oddly enough, I agree with BM. GC undermined his own argument in the process of writing it.

Yeah, but is that actually scummy?

The flaw in his reasoning could have been an honest mistake, but there's also a good possibility it wasn't (its very easy for scum to jump on a standard anti town tell such as voting no lynch), and its light years better than a random vote. The random voting stage does exactly zero for forward momentum.

His join date is November 2008 though...are you really truly thinking nub scum or are you stirring the pot? He didn't really sound like a true nub to me.

Level of noobness had nothing to do with it. This isn't the road to rome, we don't have to mollycoddle anybody here.

But I like how you're practically coaching him into playing the newb card to defend himself.

My assumption is of your point of reference from my own perspective then, because in

my

experience, jumping on a page 1 standard anti-town tell and making a mess of it isn't something that an

experienced player

would do, regardless of alignment. Town would jump on to stimulate conversation, scum would do the same, but

neither

would expect to do more than get things going. Either alignment is just as interested in getting the game going as the other.
Let's look at your "The flaw in his reasoning" comment.


I disagree with the strawman argument that GC disproved his own case. He did not say that a no-lynch vote would

not

generate discussion, in fact, he said it

would

.
What his point is as I read it, is that Hoopla made a move that revealed no alignment information.
That point is correct.
That does not just apply to Hoopla, it also applies to the entire mafia theory discussion regarding voting no lynch on page 1. The side that someone chooses is not indicative of alignment in my experience, so that any case we eventually get to will be via a tangent on the discussion of said theory.

At this point, I am most suspicious of the following group of people and not necessarily in this order:

1: Hoopla - for using what apparently has become a rather common method of starting a game, and then voting for the player that began chasing after it,

when the ploy fails entirely if everyone ignores it

. Additional suspicion for creating the false statement that GC was contradicting himself.
2: BattleMage and OhGodMyLife - for going along with the thought that there was a flaw with GC's reasoning at face value. I dont think either one of you actually examined the statements and the points that were being made. If you did, follow up with the logic, rather than perpetuating the idea that GC made a mistake, without any backing.

@BM - Sobeahero is correcting the false statement you are perpetuating. While jumping on GC might not merit a vote from him, your taking the reigns of a wagon and spurring it along by ignoring the content of the paragraphs that were actually written, and arriving at an attack on GC by way of ignoring that content, is a perfectly good reason to vote you should he decide to do so.

I dont agree with Yos2's fos on Seraphim, or Shanba's vote on him. The way I read it, he voted Hoopla for first trying to generate discussion, then slamming down a vote on the first player to disagree with the move. At this point, when votes are used more as statements, or for pressure, than to actually lynch someone, I would have been more suspicious if he

didn't

unvote.
If you follow the chain of events, he didn't unvote after the FOS, he unvoted after

BM apologized for being too hasty and withdrew the FOS

.

[Ectomancer]

Just as I was about to berate you for not reading the game properly, to my chagrin I found that you had made your retracted fos a

conditional

statement. That would make it impossible for you to retract your fos before the vote was removed. What I saw was the bolded section.
Still doesnt' alter my opinion on that matter. That addresses #2.

Take your vote off my buddy Hoopla now, and

i'll retract my FoS and apologise for being too quick to judge you. Very Happy

Now, as turnabout is fair play, you now get to go back and read GC's statements thoroughly for the answer to #1. You can even find the answer to #1 in my posts as I addressed that issue there. Both questions were already answered. If you can't find the answers, ask them again later after you've put in the effort.

As for #3, attacking people for false arguments is quite a bit different than defending their target. Trying to distract from the argument being made by presenting a different one? Go back and get the answer for #1, and see why your question #3 is based upon a false premise.

[Ectomancer]

Also- Please watch the attitude. You might be a good mafia player, but that doesnt mean you can boss people around and expect them to bite. Maybe if this was Kingmaker, and you were confirmed innocent. I dont think either of these is true here.

BM

Hello Kettle? This is Pot. You are black. (to prod your failing memory, remember ordering someone to remove their vote?)

As for making a point, and then backing it up, I made the point, I backed it up, YOU just simply failed to read it, then had the balls to make this response, even after it was pointed out to you before this post, and both before and after mine, that I already

had

answered the question.

I'm going to disagree with the whole "someone who votes self or no lynch is probably town" based upon a meta. From what I've seen, this has become a common method for a game to be started, and as you know, anything that becomes recognized as a standard move for town becomes a standard move for scum as well.

I disagree with the strawman argument that GC disproved his own case. He did not say that a no-lynch vote would

not

generate discussion, in fact, he said it

would

.

What his point is as I read it, is that Hoopla made a move that revealed no alignment information.
That point is correct.

He says a no lynch vote is useless if nobody reacts to it (which you also reference later in your post). This does disarm his argument, as he does respond, and so do several other players. A random vote is also useless if nobody reacts to it.

The bolded point you can use on any of the first page random votes. If you disagree, link me to a game where a random vote does reveal alignment information.

1: Hoopla - for using what apparently has become a rather common method of starting a game, and then voting for the player that began chasing after it,

when the ploy fails entirely if everyone ignores it

. Additional suspicion for creating the false statement that GC was contradicting himself.

If the 'ploy' fails, then it's just one wasted post. I've never seen a game where a no lynch vote has been ignored - please show me one. My retaliation further validated the purpose for my no lynch vote.

QFAT. If you're scum, i think i might actually cry.

BM

Yeah, a bad defense and BM right there agreeing along. I guess you're a little too far down that road to turn back now BM?

He says a no lynch vote is useless if nobody reacts to it (which you also reference later in your post). This does disarm his argument, as he does respond, and so do several other players. A random vote is also useless if nobody reacts to it.

His response and others to the no lynch

still does not invalidate the statement that a no lynch is useless if nobody reacts to it.

Reactions to it are not addressed at all by that argument. Whether random votes are also useless does not invalidate his statement either. Straw Man here.

The bolded point you can use on any of the first page random votes. If you disagree, link me to a game where a random vote does reveal alignment information.

Again, does not invalidate his statement. If you want to say that your move is as valid as any other page 1 move, then say

that

. But you aren't. You are making a bad argument in order to simply make an argument and in doing so, trying to make GC look bad, and that

is

anti-town.

If the 'ploy' fails, then it's just one wasted post. I've never seen a game where a no lynch vote has been ignored - please show me one. My retaliation further validated the purpose for my no lynch vote.

Again, this isn't pertinent to GC's statement. It doesnt matter if you've never seen a no lynch ignored, or whether I can show you one. The same problem exists, is that it gives no information on your alignment.
Your retaliation doesnt validate a thing. All it proves is that you are willing to attack the

person

that questioned you, and not the

argument

that they are presenting. This is evident by the arguments you made then, and the arguments you are trying to apply now.
Why did you not give the reasons for your actions that you gave in this post? Why did you instead choose to pretend GC's points were wrong, rather than admitting the truth of them, and

then

explaining your points that are valid that would explain your actions despite GC's points?
Inventing debate by using strawmen to contradict statements that are true is very, very naughty.

[Ectomancer]

Good to see you again BM

[Ectomancer]

Honestly with him it's a null tell. There are better things to talk about it seems. Such as Hoopla's no lynch vote. Is it a scum gamble or town gamble trying to lure out scum.

Can you envisage a situation where this can be a scum gamble? If so, what is it?

I could see a newbie scum doing it that doesn't know any better. (IE looking scummy because they are scum). I could see someone who doesn't mind pressure that has enough experience trying the gambit. I don't believe Hoopla fits either category.

Ask Battle Mage if he knows a player that has done scummy things as scum on purpose because town falls into a "too scummy to be scum" mindset.

[Ectomancer]

While I agreed that it might be a small pro-town tell, I'm confused as to why BM seems to be trying so hard to convince us that Hoopla is a 100% confirmed innocent...

Exactly, you would think that he would have tripped over this on his way to do so:

I'm going to disagree with the whole "someone who votes self or no lynch is probably town" based upon a meta. From what I've seen, this has become a common method for a game to be started, and as you know, anything that becomes recognized as a standard move for town becomes a standard move for scum as well.

[Ectomancer]

Sooo...what's up with these 2 posts BM?
First quote you say you can name 2 town members that are trying to look scummy right out of the gate.
Second quote, you tell CKD that you'll need him this game due to the lineup, and its been awhile since you've played town.

Could you explain what you mean? It sounds like you are saying that you know 2 or 3 town members right off the bat.

I don't really see many town people try and look scummy right out the gate to find scum.

I can name at least 2 in this game.

BM

Woah, Page 1 quickly begins the bandwagon train…nothing like a newbie to rock the boat.
Yay, haven’t played with an active BM in awhile.
Page 2, lost among the fluff between BM and Seraphim. IF Bm does anything, he does get conversation started.
Page 3-4 arguing over game theory. Jesus Christ..stop with the post pyramids.
Caught up…

Hoopla, no lynches are bad (at this point)…this is a newbie tell, nothing more.

Vote Sir Tornado,

I understand newbies attacking newbies for newbie tell, but you should know better…and even though you are not currently voting Hoopla, you jumped on that because…?

Why did you feel like Hoopla was scummy and deserving of your vote?

Good to see you mate. Looking at this line-up, we're going to need all the help we can get!
And yeh, its been a while since we've played together as TOWN.

BM

[Ectomancer]

But, i'll humour you. Under what circumstances do you think i would "say i know 2 or 3 members of the town right off the bat"?

BM

I've decided to pass over it. It's not the obvious from either a scum or town perspective. I thought you were saying something that you couldnt say directly from the way you phrased things and thought you might give a different response when given an opening.

[Ectomancer]

But, i'll humour you. Under what circumstances do you think i would "say i know 2 or 3 members of the town right off the bat"?

BM

I've decided to pass over it. It's not the obvious from either a scum or town perspective. I thought you were saying something that you couldnt say directly from the way you phrased things and thought you might give a different response when given an opening.

So it was bs? Right.

BM

That's an assumption, something you are very good at. As I said, I've decided to pass it over for reasons that if I gave, wouldn't be passing it over. Dig it?

[Ectomancer]

Yos, hurry up and put your money where your mouth is before you start looking scummy.

Why are you rushing him? Why would his lack of a vote on SirT at this juncture be scummy?

[Ectomancer]

Yos, hurry up and put your money where your mouth is before you start looking scummy.

Why are you rushing him? Why would his lack of a vote on SirT at this juncture be scummy?

It doesn't have to be Sir T if he doesn't think Sir T warrants a vote, but I get a bad feeling when someone sits back and doesn't vote at all.

Why did you feel the need to make note of my comment, but not Shanba's similar post?

You said hurry up, he didn't. He simply asked why there was no vote.

[Ectomancer]

i am supremely disturbed by yos' lurkerhunt

I'm disturbed more people aren't paying attention to who is lurking and who isn't. I'm tried of always having to be the only guy who even bothers to figure out who's been lurking, and then inevitably being attacked for it, even though it's clearly in the best interests of the town.

In fact, now that I think of it, didn't YOU say:

Also, lurking will not be tolerated for much longer.

So why are you trying to protect the lurkers now?

Gajeebus OGML, my intial vote for you was partly a joke to poke at BM. Now in a short space of time, you are spurring Yos to place a vote. (I dont understand your reasoning that says he should)
Next, you jump on him for producing a rather long list of lurkers? That is entirely consistent with someone who hasn't placed a vote. If he hasn't heard sufficiently from a large portion of town, doesn't that fit?
The list itself doesn't mean he is town, but it doesn't mean he is scummy either. Why does it feel like you are seeking a reason to attack him?

[Ectomancer]

Hey there Puta. You don't intend to quote Shakespeare all through this game too do you? Are you working on your Major or something?
The lady doth quote too much, methinks.

[Ectomancer]

Forgot to add the

[Ectomancer]

Confirm

vote OhGodMyLife

Too many contradictions.

I looked at what he had to say about SirT.

Let's see, there was an uncommented Vote.
Next we have "Can we talk more about how Sir Tornado is scum and needs a bigger bandwagon?"
Tries to prod Yos into joining the bandwagon, also with no actual comment on SirT
Somewhere in there he said he had found scum.

Overall though, we have no case presented by OGML against SirT, then the switch out of the blue to Tubby's wagon.

Combine that with my earlier assessment of his interaction with Yos, and I think

this

is the bandwagon that should have legs.

Gajeebus OGML, my intial vote for you was partly a joke to poke at BM. Now in a short space of time, you are spurring Yos to place a vote. (I dont understand your reasoning that says he should)
Next, you jump on him for producing a rather long list of lurkers? That is entirely consistent with someone who hasn't placed a vote. If he hasn't heard sufficiently from a large portion of town, doesn't that fit?
The list itself doesn't mean he is town, but it doesn't mean he is scummy either. Why does it feel like you are seeking a reason to attack him?

[Ectomancer]

Puta Puta is a better lynch than tubby.

Based upon...?

[Ectomancer]

That's what happens when anyone gets lynched. What will make you unique?

[Ectomancer]

Will we always lynch a useless, erratic player if we know they are a useless, erratic player as a matter of course?

[Ectomancer]

I'm a cop. I don't remember (if any) who I investigated O_O

either I didn't sent in a name for investigation or I did but something happened, cuz I never got a report, lol

try reading your role it usually helps you were already lynched in that game

This.

[Ectomancer]

And, BTW, if there is a replacement, and he/she claims that Puta Puta false claimed as cop as townie, I am all for a lynch. The ONLY way I support Puta Puta staying alive is if that character IS a cop

and

is ready to give us results on a daily basis.

I disagree with your premise and I also object to you prematurely limiting anything a fantasy replacement might have to say.

[Ectomancer]

nothin much

Please don't be a troll. Its a fun game. Give it a shot. I'd rather see you turn into a good player than someone who cant get anyone to play with them.

[Ectomancer]

In this sort of situation where Puta claimed cop without really following the game, is it worthwhile pressing for a confirmation claim from his replacement? I could honestly see him being a cop or scum, or even just a townie.

This is good talk.

[Ectomancer]

unvote

<ponders>

[Ectomancer]

Yield to my VOA and claim so we can talk about your role and ask you questions. This sounds like a give up post, and I dont like give up posts.

[Ectomancer]

Assuming you now understand, i'll allow you to explain why you are now virtually confirmed town.

BM

The mods not confirming him town BM.

[Ectomancer]

Unvote Vote: Yos.
I have read some of Natirasha's other games. Terse and angry seems pretty normal.

Huh? I didn't say anything about Natirasha's other games. Do you have me confused with someone else, or what?

This strikes me as an attempt to distract the issue.

Shanba, what's the issue anyways?

Sincerity. It's what's lacking.

[Ectomancer]

I never saw why tubby wasn't lynched already.

I believe it was because BM thinks the mod showed a town card on Tubby. I dont think The Fonz did and while I can understand that BM could have that belief, I dont share it. I think that what BM saw is his own gut's reaction. Let it influence his own thinking, but it does not justify the rest of the town dropping the pursuit of they believe in the case against Tubby.

While I think chasing lurkers out of the corner is a priority, I dont see why a Tubby wagon would be flagging if the proponents of it felt that they had found scum.

[Ectomancer]

Der Hammer,
posts very little and when he does there is hardly any content
so what aever happened to this

Will make a post more with a more detailed amount of my thoughts so far later

My game changing analysis is nearly here. Hopefully sometime sunday

It's almost a week past schedule. Any cost overruns as well on this project?

[Ectomancer]

Policy lynches based upon logic is a fine point of discussion and entirely relevant here. Why would you discourage the logic discussion, and then go on to say you would be ok with lynching him today? What is your rational there?

Have you got past page 3 yet?

[Ectomancer]

[quote="Der Hammer With the distracting play by several of the so-called veteran quality players,the mafia were clearly slipping through the day unnoticed so I thought me being a "waste of space" miller should be the one to take the fall,and at least some of you amazing players should spot the mafia based on their reaction to my claim.[/quote]

Name names please, we love drama. Also, make an assessment of the distracting posts by those players. Any you see as contrived distraction?

[Ectomancer]

Geez, and here I thought I was 'established' as a player who likes bizzare gambits

You're right though, I haven't thought of that one and certainly haven't tried to pull it off before. I agree that the circumstances don't support a Scum DH. I say don't lynch him...ever. Let scum do their own dirty work. Their only hope would be to keep that aura of doubt surrounding him so that town will feel forced to lynch him. If that is their hope, they better not let us both live to end game.

[Ectomancer]

I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it...

[Ectomancer]

But seriously. Your argument opens the way to massive scum WIFOM gambits. At the very most, you should give Der Hammer enough townie credit to cancel out the miller claim; no more. "Don't lynch him ever" is right out.

There is no giving 'townie credit' here. Here and now we make our decision as town. What we won't have is leaving this up in the air, and here is why:

1: If we don't believe him, he is scum, we lynch him here today after we are content with the discussion.

2: If we believe him, we make a pact as town here and now not to lynch him...at all. That pact forces scum to deal with him. They cant afford to go into endgame with what we are essentially deciding is a confirmed townie. It also presents the possibility of blocking a NK somewhere along the way, or, our boy gets into endgame. Also, making the pact means we wont have to worry about our power roles going crosspurposes, Doc/Vig being a simple example (no, not saying we have them). We cant waver on this. Once the decision is made, we stand solid on it.

3: If we believe him, but can't reach a consensus to never lynch him, then we kill him today. Scum has to

know

that we wont lynch him, else they dont have to bother to waste a NK on someone they know we will lynch. Keeping him around has dubious value. Cut him loose while we have elbow room to do it.


So here's the time for the Poker fans. #1 and #3 are the safe routes. The card flips and he is scum or he is town, either way, the game is not won or lost yet.
#2 is the gamble. Should he prove to be scum, we lose. But...if he is town, there are some tangible benefits to keeping him around and we set scum a task that they have to deal with.

The question is, how good is your gut?

I think I see now why the policy is lynch all claimed millers.

[Ectomancer]

This game starting in Day One made me think their might just be a cult in this game

This makes no sense to me.

I guess there could be a cult? No evidence for or against.

[Ectomancer]

You chopped my post Yosarian. The "DH is town" statement is an If Then Else statement, not binary at all. If we cant reach a consensus to never lynch him, thus forcing scum to deal with him, then we vote him here and now, today and get him out of here because what that says to me is that people still suspect he is scum, and if you suspect someone is scum, then you lynch them, period.

[Ectomancer]

you saying "we should lynch him right now unless we are all absolutly 100% positive we would never ever lynch him no matter what" seems like a pretty absurdly high bar.

Which is why I said I see why there is a policy lynch to claimed millers. And of course if he is proven scum by a tracker then you would lynch him.
I don't think we have that many gamblers in this crowd anyhow.

[Ectomancer]

It's the doubt isn't it? If I'm going to lynch someone because I'm afraid they are scum, I'd prefer to do it sooner than later. If I could convince the rest of you to take the gamble and not lynch him at all, forcing scum to make the kill or allowing someone confirmed by strategy, it would be useful to keep him around. But keeping him around until the wiggle room is so narrow it really hurts to go ahead and finally lynch him? That's procrastination, which usually puts you into a tight spot. (take it from a procrastinator)
I reckon that's more opinion than logic, but there you are.

[Ectomancer]

It's the doubt isn't it? If I'm going to lynch someone because I'm afraid they are scum, I'd prefer to do it sooner than later.

Ok. So why are you "afraid he is scum"?

Replace I'm with town. If town as a collective is afraid that he is scum then we lynch him now while we have wiggle room to deal with it unfettered.
If I wasn't willing to do this, I wouldn't have suggested it in the first place. As far as I can see the situation, it is the one instance in which you would

not

lynch a claimed miller because then you force

scum

to deal with him. Assuming you believe him to be town that is.

[Ectomancer]

Even if we vowed not to kill him throughout the game, under the belief we think he is town - it's a fallacy to think scum need to deal with it. If it gets to lylo with DH still alive, wouldn't doubt be creeping back in? It's just eventual unnecessary WIFOM which harms and distracts the town.

That's when you grow some balls and stick by your decision. If you can't pick a row and hoe it, you've got no use farming. Lacking those balls, we lynch him and get the answer and problem out of our hair today.

[Ectomancer]

You've got 2 other options, pick one. I'm not twisting your arm. Just testing the intestinal fortitude and committment to an opinion of this town. I see no reason to leave him alive unless we plan to never lynch him. Otherwise, the gain is dubious, and the end result is that scum wont do our dirty work for us.
Either agree, or let's lynch him.

[Ectomancer]

Ecto:
1- I find that abstract theory discussion to be harmful to the town, if not to the mafia game in general. Why argue if lynching millers in general is a good or bad idea, when we have our own personal miller, with his personal characteristics (not posting, then volunteering to die, then posting content when asked).

In short - Non specific theory discussion - cop out for scum. Specific discussion about players - good.

2- At the time I posted that post, Der Hammer was not posting and refusing to contribute. I find that lynching non contributing players >>> no-lynching at deadline. That said, I prefer to lynch someone I actually have reasons to find scummy, that is why I'm voting Seraph at the moment.

(Unfortunately, I have not really read the thread after this post from Ecto - I'll do that later - sorry if you had any questions for me)

You know what Claus, I dont even know what part of the game you are at or even commenting on. What post?? I've spoken a number of times about the Miller.

In short - Non specific theory discussion - cop out for scum. Specific discussion about players - good.

Excuse me? This is very specific discussion. Don't give me a pithy bullstein "pro-town" statement about theory discussion being useless. I've given the 3

specific

options that I would be fine with, that

doesn't

include leaving him alive unless we never plan to lynch him.
That's called taking a position. There is nothing non-specific

or

abstract about the paths that I've asked town to follow.
How's this for a theory discussion Claus? Let's start a policy lynch beginning this game and

lynch any player that tries to discourage discussion

.
That would be you Claus. I find this type of statement from you to be a type of pandering to the town, particularly when, by making it, you avoid the exposure involved in actually addressing what I've said. You're avoiding culpability and I wonder why you would do that hmmm?

[Ectomancer]

Irrelevant ego battle between BM and Ectomancer. (79-82, 86).

WTF? Post 86 was CKD saying he was back again. Post 87 was the last post in this little series, and by me. Irrelevant ego battle? Are you kidding me? Are you avoiding another opportunity to take a position here by giving an offhand dismissal to another area of discussion?

Why don't you try again? Here you go, taken right from post 87. Where do you stand on this? This isn't an ego battle, this is

discussion

on a case that was being presented against GC, and our subsequent disagreement on it.

What do you think of the case being debated?

What about the questions I asked BM at the bottom?

I'm going to disagree with the whole "someone who votes self or no lynch is probably town" based upon a meta. From what I've seen, this has become a common method for a game to be started, and as you know, anything that becomes recognized as a standard move for town becomes a standard move for scum as well.

I disagree with the strawman argument that GC disproved his own case. He did not say that a no-lynch vote would

not

generate discussion, in fact, he said it

would

.

What his point is as I read it, is that Hoopla made a move that revealed no alignment information.
That point is correct.

He says a no lynch vote is useless if nobody reacts to it (which you also reference later in your post). This does disarm his argument, as he does respond, and so do several other players. A random vote is also useless if nobody reacts to it.

The bolded point you can use on any of the first page random votes. If you disagree, link me to a game where a random vote does reveal alignment information.

1: Hoopla - for using what apparently has become a rather common method of starting a game, and then voting for the player that began chasing after it,

when the ploy fails entirely if everyone ignores it

. Additional suspicion for creating the false statement that GC was contradicting himself.

If the 'ploy' fails, then it's just one wasted post. I've never seen a game where a no lynch vote has been ignored - please show me one. My retaliation further validated the purpose for my no lynch vote.

QFAT. If you're scum, i think i might actually cry.

BM

Yeah, a bad defense and BM right there agreeing along. I guess you're a little too far down that road to turn back now BM?

He says a no lynch vote is useless if nobody reacts to it (which you also reference later in your post). This does disarm his argument, as he does respond, and so do several other players. A random vote is also useless if nobody reacts to it.

His response and others to the no lynch

still does not invalidate the statement that a no lynch is useless if nobody reacts to it.

Reactions to it are not addressed at all by that argument. Whether random votes are also useless does not invalidate his statement either. Straw Man here.

The bolded point you can use on any of the first page random votes. If you disagree, link me to a game where a random vote does reveal alignment information.

Again, does not invalidate his statement. If you want to say that your move is as valid as any other page 1 move, then say

that

. But you aren't. You are making a bad argument in order to simply make an argument and in doing so, trying to make GC look bad, and that

is

anti-town.

If the 'ploy' fails, then it's just one wasted post. I've never seen a game where a no lynch vote has been ignored - please show me one. My retaliation further validated the purpose for my no lynch vote.

Again, this isn't pertinent to GC's statement. It doesnt matter if you've never seen a no lynch ignored, or whether I can show you one. The same problem exists, is that it gives no information on your alignment.
Your retaliation doesnt validate a thing. All it proves is that you are willing to attack the

person

that questioned you, and not the

argument

that they are presenting. This is evident by the arguments you made then, and the arguments you are trying to apply now.
Why did you not give the reasons for your actions that you gave in this post? Why did you instead choose to pretend GC's points were wrong, rather than admitting the truth of them, and

then

explaining your points that are valid that would explain your actions despite GC's points?
Inventing debate by using strawmen to contradict statements that are true is very, very naughty.

[Ectomancer]

What happened to Claus? Christmas?

[Ectomancer]

9 days people. Quit using it as an excuse for your vote.

[Ectomancer]

vote Sir T

Something I read earlier. (No, I wont elaborate today) I also don't like how he got a bye from people because he was being replaced, but now hasn't been? I don't mind him playing at all, but why is he getting passed over?

[Ectomancer]

unvote, vote Der Hammer

While an investigation was not revealed, I believe the pressure was still high when the Miller claim came out. I dont believe that forgives the earlier behavior, particularly since he shouldn't have been drawing that much attention anyhow.

[Ectomancer]

[
i don't know. i kinda say we keep him at least for one more day.

I'm confused by this. It sounds like you're saying you don't want to lynch him today, you'd rather lynch him tommorow, and that dosn't really make any sense for a claimed miller. If you think he's town, you shouldn't want him lynched tommorow; and if you think he's scum, you should want him dead today, right?

Wasn't that my earlier point?

[Ectomancer]

I believe people are oversimplifying when saying that we are simply dealing with a Miller claim. We have a Miller claim on day 1 after he was under serious pressure. Had he done this from the outset, or had not had the questionable play this game, I believe that we would be having a different discussion.

[Ectomancer]

YAY it's back up. I need my injection.

Yeah, I was hurting.

Yos, Miller claim out of the equation, what are your thoughts on Der Hammer? I may have missed it, but your main thrust surrounding DH has been that we shouldn't lynch a claimed miller out of hand, but I dont know where you actually stand on his behavior. Its interesting that you've mentioned him so often, but I dont recall that bit of information. If you've said it before, a quote is fine for a response.

[Ectomancer]

What is?

[Ectomancer]

Pressure is not a quantity measured by number of votes Claus. Of course you know this, but couldn't pass up the opportunity to throw some dirt, all the while saying you agree with the lynch?
Your statement is the one that does not jive with the facts.
Coming from an experienced player, who should know what pressure is, that is a cause for uneasineass.

[Ectomancer]

Haha! That was good. Not the usual response I get

[Ectomancer]

*sigh*

So that people can't adjust their suspicion list based upon his results.

[Ectomancer]

That's the whole idea of the role...

You are entirely missing the point. His investigation result

confirms alignment

once we can be sure he is a cop. Right now is the time, before any results are revealed, for everyone to state what their suspicions are. That way

scum

cannot adjust their lies to fit the investigation result.[/u][/i]

[Ectomancer]

i have no clue what his results are,

and ecto explained it better already

Exactly, I don't know why he chose to respond to you in that manner except to continue to act like a clueless ninny.

vote militant

[Ectomancer]

here's a good one

I would think that part of the exercise is also in seeing which game he would choose.

[Ectomancer]

As long as discussion is spawning itself Claus, let's let it spin. Once it lulls and we need the kick to end the day we can follow up on your information and everyone's suspicion list.

[Ectomancer]

You guys had your chance for my Der Hammer vote yesterday. My view of the optimal play now is to leave him be and try to eliminate the scum before we need to fear the BoogeyMiller. If we get to the point where we are wetting our pants, we can weigh our options then.

[Ectomancer]

You scumbags need to give reason for lynching Der Hammer. I'm not putting up with this crap much longer.

[Ectomancer]

I'm drifting just now. I'll try to refocus on this game in the next week.

[Ectomancer]

vote Hoopla

[Ectomancer]

Why the double question mark?

[Ectomancer]

If having mod-confirmation on a cop who almost certainly would have been treated as such anyway (considering he claimed a truthful guilty result yesterday) is really that unfair to the scum, can we, like, get a random vanilla townie upgraded to a cop, or something?

Or a role determined by the mod but not revealed to anyone but the affected townie. There is a broad range of roles, including buffing an existing one that would give a better balancing tool for what was lost. We can't recover that, but I would like the mod to consider this and at least decide for or against it.

I have taken all the action that I am going to take. I am happy to discuss my reasons for it after the game has ended.

[Ectomancer]

I got confirmation of my result... I will give some attention to Alpha Centauri Mafia, and then I will post here. Do not wait to hear from me before next week (unless you plan to lynch someone, then by all means please wait until I return so I can clear anyone who needs to be cleared).

Any particular reason you didn't just post your result?

I really wonder about people who ask questions like that.

[Ectomancer]

Well, it is a little strange for you to be questioning a mod-confirmed-town-dead-cop, Sensan.

This.

[Ectomancer]

For Sensfan who apparently asks questions just to hear himself talk.

I got confirmation of my result... I will give some attention to Alpha Centauri Mafia, and then I will post here. Do not wait to hear from me before next week (unless you plan to lynch someone, then by all means please wait until I return so I can clear anyone who needs to be cleared).

Any particular reason you didn't just post your result?

I really wonder about people who ask questions like that.

And why would that be?

Well, it is a little strange for you to be questioning a mod-confirmed-town-dead-cop, Sensan.

I wasn't questioning him at all. I was just asking why he didn't post the results.

For Ectomancer, who either failed to read 3 posts back, or else ignored the fact I rebutted that point.

[Ectomancer]

unvote, vote Sensfan

Your rebuttal sucked.

[Ectomancer]

Wait...you're voting me, over the mod-confirmed Cop's Guilty result, because I asked said Cop why they didn't post their result right then?

Yep.

[Ectomancer]

That's a demerit.

[Ectomancer]

Nevermind, missed Claus' last post trying to read from my cellphone

unvote

[Ectomancer]

vote Magisterrain

[Ectomancer]

Because I thought he had got a guilty result, not that he had

given

the result. Quite a different scenario.

[Ectomancer]

no the part where you voted me,

it seems off, like out of the three people you mentioned as scum ( with out any justification or insight i might add) u decided to vote for me. Wich in all likelyhood is the easier lynch since i came so close to it back on day.

You have no real evidence, no quotes or slip ups to point out. I believe you are scum and are trying to skate to a win.

Oh wow. I couldn't have written a scummier defense for tubby if I tried. "I didn't make any slip ups! You have no evidence!" I'm definitely up for a tubby216 lynch.

I agree. This looks like a slip up.

vote tubby216

If I ignore Sensfan he will go away, if he bothers to post about the topic again at all.

[Ectomancer]

Difference between protown and scum. Throw in indifferent play and you have Sensfan. Seriously, I told you two pages ago that if I ignored him he would go away and all he has is this fold on the Tubby play? I don't find that scummy, I find it lazy. Pot > Kettle > Black

[Ectomancer]

This sense of Tubby vs Sensfan disturbs me and Yosarian's apparent attempt to cement that idea disturbs me more.

Hey Tubby, I thought I saw something like this, but then had to backtrack because I missed Claus actually naming his guilty suspect. Was this quoted section prior to that?

then after that he starts sweating about claus' result to me looks like scum tryin to figure out if he is caught or not,
he said it would be anti town to talk still if claus had a guilty already. i strongly dissagree because the more we talk the more scum slipp up and the more info we have as town

Waiting with baited breath Sensfan.

[Ectomancer]

This sense of Tubby vs Sensfan disturbs me and Yosarian's apparent attempt to cement that idea disturbs me more.

Hey Tubby, I thought I saw something like this, but then had to backtrack because I missed Claus actually naming his guilty suspect. Was this quoted section prior to that?

then after that he starts sweating about claus' result to me looks like scum tryin to figure out if he is caught or not,
he said it would be anti town to talk still if claus had a guilty already. i strongly dissagree because the more we talk the more scum slipp up and the more info we have as town

Waiting with baited breath Sensfan.

ecto are you supporting that comment or questioning it?

Sometimes I wonder if I'm speaking a different language than others...

I'm saying that I was berating Sensfan for the same thing way back then, but later discovered that I missed that a guilty

and

a player name had been given already, so my comments were out of place. Can you point out where you are not making the exact same mistake?
If you are saying that even with a guilty and a player name we should keep dragging things on, I would say that topic is very open to debate.

[Ectomancer]

This sense of Tubby vs Sensfan disturbs me and Yosarian's apparent attempt to cement that idea disturbs me more.

Actually, no, I'm trying to get some kind of real content out of both of them so we can make an informed lynch. You might have me confused with Xyl or something.

Mmmm maybe. I'm being lazy myself. The following quotes are what I used to arrive at that idea.

Oh yeah. SensFan and/or tubby.

Yup, that's the plan.

Tubby: SInce Sensfan is totally failing at trying to make a case against you, it would be wise for you to actually make a case against him, especally since you've been voting him for a while now and all you said about it was "I'm good with that".

[Ectomancer]

It's not a matter of versus. They're both scum, and we're lynching SensFan first.

Ok great, then you won't mind doing a complete recap of your case on each one of them. (Ecto is a hypocrite)

[Ectomancer]

I don't know that I've played with Xyl that much before, but he seems kind of dead-set on lynching me :/

But yeah, I will definitively be doing my analysis of the two I named. Just give me a few days, maybe.

Heh, I love this. You know what happens when you do an analysis with a pre-determined result? If you said you get a biased view, you would be correct. It seems to me that if you find someone scummy, then you can at least give a rough idea of what it is

before

having to go back and do some in depth research. I guarantee you that I could take

any

player in this game and give you a scenario by which they are scum.
I'd like you to give a rough reasoning prior to your review. (of course you may have already re-read, so...)
The chain of events leads me to believe your 'suspicions' were a result of pressure on you to post. I've poked you twice now (tongue in cheek) for a reason for choosing the players that you did, even stating that you would ignore me (and you did).
So. What made you narrow your review to these players?

[Ectomancer]

Ok. Let's see where we stand, because I am looking at end result, and perhaps you are only looking at motivating some action via vote?
I wouldn't lynch Sensfan on the stalling and lack of content motifs. Voting to change his behavior, sure. I'll give you that.

Tubby's single post I can't really argue. I've found scum based off a slip they made in one post before. If I were to find the slip that you mean, it is probably this piece, and I think I may agree with you. It's what I call the "Ya got nuttin on me" defense.

You have no real evidence, no quotes or slip ups to point out.

[Ectomancer]

In case someone was wondering, I haven't placed a vote because I would like to look at a competing case before dropping one. I don't consider Sensfan to be a viable one other than motivating him into action.

[Ectomancer]

I'm not sure if this was directed at me or at Xyl:

I wouldn't lynch Sensfan on the stalling and lack of content motifs. Voting to change his behavior, sure. I'll give you that.

I do think stalling and lack of content are good reasons to vote someone, but beyond that, he's been doing this thing where he goes back and fourth on either insisting he has given content, giving excuses for not giving content, and stalling, all without actually saying anything game related; and that really is a scum tell, especally the way he's been doing it.

Hmm. How many games have you played with Sensfan?

[Ectomancer]

Ok, do you have anything more, or will you back off the trigger? It's L-1 I believe.

[Ectomancer]

CuriousKarmaDog, Der Hammer, Xtoxm, and vollkan I charge you all with not hammering Sensfan unless you can put together something more substantial yourselves. I will certainly view any "$@%# it, let's lynch him" in a very poor light.

[Ectomancer]

CuriousKarmaDog, Der Hammer, Xtoxm, and vollkan I charge you all with hammering SensFan immediately. I will certainly view any cowardly reluctance to lynch your scumbuddy in a poor light.

Heheh, love the editting.

[Ectomancer]

vote tubby216

[Ectomancer]

@ecto
why???

2 scum groups make even scum good at scum hunting. I think you be purple and Xyl routed you out.

[Ectomancer]

@ecto
why???

2 scum groups make even scum good at scum hunting. I think you be purple and Xyl routed you out.

lame try agian

No, I believe in 1 line slips. Sometimes that's all you get, though Adel does make a case for a 2nd in your case.

[Ectomancer]

unvote

Mafia traitor does cause a pause. If, as speculated, we have 3 and 3, that would leave 1 more potential mafia member, giving us a 13 town 7 scum ratio. Even with 2 scum groups, I think this is excessive.

In my mind, here's a couple things Xyl could have been doing.

If he knew the mafiates, and was purple, then he would know Tubby would be the last purple, kill him and he would remain town. Town looks in decent shape right now, so I think this would be a good choice. Thing is, that would make 3 purple, plus a potential 4th. In that case, I would assume a 2 red scum group.

Another possibility is 2 scum groups of 2 with a mafia traitor. I don't believe that Xyl could join either scum group

and

know who they are, though there may be another mechanic that involves the traitor. That would give us 2 scum groups of 2 with the possibility of 1 of them increasing their number by 1.
If that is the case, purple is dead, traitor is dead, and we are looking for (likely) 1 red.

At any rate, we need to find red scum if possible as opposed to purple today. If purple still exists there should only be 1 and I think Tubby would be that guy based upon the theory that Xyl knew it to be a losing cause, even if he could get Tubby to recruit him. Then again, if Xyl was the red traitor, he would also know how many red scum there are, and whether Tubby was one of them.

My only concern with a Xyl that is a traitor to only 1 scum group is that my sense of game balance is completely thrown off kilter. I can't resolve it without either giving 1 scum group an advantage over the other (they dont have to recruit their 3rd member),

or

some other mechanism that would allow Xyl to be recruited by either scum group without knowing who they are. If Xyl knew who both scum groups are, he could have simply announced it day 1 and hoped they didn't recruit him out of spite.

We really can only guess as to the numbers of each group and the function of the mafia traitor. That leaves me with keeping my vote on Tubby unless something more concrete presents itself.

[Ectomancer]

vote Tubby

(again)

[Ectomancer]

In my opinion, unlikely.

[Ectomancer]

Then again, if Xyl was the red traitor, he would also know how many red scum there are, and whether Tubby was one of them.

At this point in the game, I don't think that Xyl wanted to be recruited and was out to eliminate that possibility. Before he died last night, there was 1 red and 1 purple dead. If he knew Tubby was one of his potential partners, and was already in trouble, the obvious move (to me) would be to get rid of him and throw in with the town.
That's entirely an assumption, and that I think the scum pairs were more likely 2 and 2 with mafia traitor thrown into the mix for a 15 town 4 scum 1 wildcard. 10 player games have 2 scum, double that and you get 20 players with 4 scum. The only piece I'm missing is how to balance that traitor between the groups.
I reckon it is possible that we have 1 unrevealed traitor (for the side opposite of Xyl).

Let me talk this out.

If Xyl was potential purple (and there was only 2 total), then with his death purple should be gone. If there were 2 red total, then we would only have 1, plus possibly a red traitor.

If you exist and know only one of your color is left, claim and lets win ok?

They could also have possibly been recruited.

Night 1 we only had 1 kill, while nights 2, 3, and 4 we had 3. Odd that. Looks like a possible recruitment that night, even if you consider a doc/block, unless what looks like a Vig or SK decided not to kill that night. A Vig I could see hesitating to explain one of them, an SK not so much.

So round and round about we go.

Anyhow, I'm going with a Tubby lynch with 2 motivations, 1 is that I actually agreed with Xyl on the 'slip' and Adel's example from today, though weaker, could also be a valid example. That is the main reason, with the possibility of Xyl killing off possibly the last of the scum group that could recruit him, and he fingered Tubby. Given the good possibility that he really was scumhunting following a lead that made sense to me at that time also makes sense today.

I'm also suspicious of Tubby's question on whether we would be in LYLO tomorrow if we lynched him. If the answer was yes, even if he were scum or an SK, he would count towards the total number opposite the other scum group and could plead a case for finding the other scum first before lynching him. Maybe I should have said yes when he asked to see if he tried to strike a bargain...

[Ectomancer]

I think I just resolved the balance issue in my head with the scum traitor. If you had 1 scum group of 2, and 1 scum group of 3 with a mafia traitor, then yes it could potentially grow larger, but the situation I just explained where the traitor decides to go with town also puts them at a disadvantage.
The only doubt I'm harboring is that there was only 1 purple dead yesterday, so the idea that Xyl was bussing Tubby as the 3rd member of purple doesn't really apply yet unless he intended to get both of them, which I sort of doubt.

I'm going to unvote because Red was the first group to get lynched. I don't see why Xyl would turn on his own group when unsure of how large the other group might be. If I were in that situation, with only 1 red and 1 purple dead, I would hedge my bets and hold tight seeing what transpired.

So I think the idea that Xyl was trying to get Tubby lynched as a member of his scum group isn't really believable. What remains is the idea that Xyl was probably scum hunting, but not within his own group is more believable. Thing is, without the other leg of Xyl turning traitor yesterday the 'slips' aren't really enough to vote on.

unvote

[Ectomancer]

Alright OGML, the mass claim thing. We've got 8 alive and we think we have as many as 3 scum in 2 different scum groups. There also appears to be a vig/sk accounting for the 3rd kill,

unless

we have 3 scum groups of 2. (Mafia traitor role always bugs me, and from Yos' response, I guess I still dont really fully understand the role)

Anyhow, with todays lynch and those 3, we end up with 4 kills.

Lets look at the numbers and this is my best guess and open to debate.

Red-2
Purple-1
SK-1
Town-4
or no SK and Town - 5

That looks scary to me. But I don't think I agree with a mass claim. If there are any remaining protection type roles, I dont think it wise to expose them, assuming of course that they dont protect red...

1 of those bullets is reds.
2 of those bullets will be firing into a crowd containing both red and 5 others.
1 bullet will be 25% influenced by red

So. We can gamble on one of those hitting red.

We have the benefit of seeing the result of the first one before nightfall. If it is

not

red, then here was what needs to happen.

Purple, do not submit a kill tonight

I understand that often a mod will not allow an SK to submit a no kill. Obviously an SK isn't going to claim and confirm or deny that for us, so...
It is up to you to maintain the balance if today's kill does not turn up red.

Alrighty, if we can agree to trust scum to do what is best for their win condition, then we can move along and talk about the Vig and the SK.

I see two choices. Leave them 100% in control of the decision of their target. They have every incentive to their own win condition to hit red whatever their alignment is.

Well, honestly, I dont see a real 2nd choice. I dont think allowing red 25% influence in an attempt to direct a Vig/SK kill is a wise choice over 0% chance of them influencing it.

However, I think today that we should at least provide guidance in the form of placing a vote for our lynch target today, and then posting your choice for the Vig/SK tonight. I think that's a nice way to further establish voting patterns before tonight and tomorrow (kind of a 2 for 1 day with no night kill).

So there's some jerky.

[Ectomancer]

xyl was unrecruited. meaning he belonged to neither,
the only reason xyl thought me scum was do to my preformance in his game xyl's relative chaos where i was scum.



but here is a question,
if you lynch me today and i am townwill that put us a lylo tomorrow?

In my opinion, unlikely.

unvote

why did you think that lylo was "unlikely"?

Off the hip. You should have seen the spiraled loops of conversation I had written before that last post. It helps me work things out when I'm making a post because often I will find the fallacies as I'm typing. Sometimes I like to leave it in so that people can see the train of my thought, but I find that more often than not it just confuses people.

[Ectomancer]

or why don't we nolynch today and see waht happens tonite?

that would still give us better odds yes?

I don't know. Someone else take a look.

[Ectomancer]

Heh, I don't know that I'd advise a vig to claim vig either.

[Ectomancer]

Hopefully he will claim an investigation.

[Ectomancer]

Made an offer on a home today which means my time is taken for the next few weeks fixing the old one and then moving, putting kids into new schools, etc, etc, etc. Needing a replacement.

[Ectomancer]

So as not to leave my replacement stuck with a guess, I explained why I believed purple shouldn't shoot. It avoids the dilemma of a 2 scum group winning by surviving the 3 kills that aren't controlled by them. Yosarian's math analyzing the situation is much more involved than I ever bothered to go into, and I might agree with it, but I don't have time to pick it apart as I indicated, which is why

I

didn't get into it in the first place.

[Ectomancer]

Good game scumbags. Sorry I had to replace out. Might have gone slightly differently as Yos set off my "Why exactly is he doing this?" radar after he attacked my directive to any possible remaining purple scum to hold their kill that night. I thought at the time that I was right, but didnt have time to delve into Yos' dissecting of the issue and I don't think anyone else bothered to either. Still haven't had a chance to do more than skim the game. (I move in 10 days! 3 bedroom 2 bath with 3 living areas and a pool! Woohoo!)
Thanks for replacing my Fonz, sorry I couldn't complete it. I liked the setup and how it was playing out.

Yos' alignment does reinforce my belief that I am taking the right path in developing my scum hunting. Sounds odd, but I try not to take into account who the player is, or really what they said so much as what their statement accomplishes and why they would want that to happen. If it looks fishy, it probably is. My problem now is that I have a tendency to leave those people alive long enough to try to see if there was another explanation or not