Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[maxwellhouse]

okay, i don't have much time right now to thoroughly read everything, but i'll come back later tonight. sorry about not contributing too much.

[StrangerCoug]

I have to leave at the moment, but I really am doing the player review. As I said, I'm skipping Battle Mage on purpose and told him to skip me in his own review, but I do have the first seven of the other players alphabetically at this point.

[earthworm]

On the topic of vote-hopping, what do you guys think of this? In five posts, Cephrir made 3 different votes.

Vote: Untitled

for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

Also, same question for Cephrir:

Vote: Untitled for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

I checked your posts and you didn't.

Hum. 'Kay.

And well... BM said a lot for me. Basically I think his viewpoint during that argument was rather illogical, I don't feel like sifting through the 10 pages of pregame just to QFT BM. Untitled isn't actually as bad as he was in my head though. Man, I do that a lot. So, I'd rather pursue my other suspect-of-sorts.

Unvote, Vote: nhat

It's a good EA case, but Cass kinda has a point. I was going to say what she did, but then I read nhat's reply and realized he was right. I still find him scummy but I want to pursue EA for... reasons. Not just nhat's case.

Unvote, Vote EA

It's made worse by the fact that every single one of Cephrir's votes were made onto people who already had bandwagons formed on them, with rarely more justification than was already provided by the bandwagon. I'd like to know what people think, because the only other game I'm playing is being moderated by Cephrir, so I'm having a hard time viewing him impartially.

[raider8169]

On the topic of vote-hopping, what do you guys think of this?

Its a minor scum tell but right now as no one as a solid case anything is possible.

[Erratus Apathos]

Fine EA, let me attack your arguments. In your first vote on Netlava, your reasoning is because he is expressing his disapproval of two players and their long-winded discussion about *sigh* the pact. You equate this with discouraging argument of any kind, prevote him on page 4, then stay silent until the day begins, with your first post of the day being a vote on Netlava with no other comments about anything.

At the time of Netlava's post, the pact discussion was the only discussion. Netlava tried to discourage that discussion without promoting any other form of discussion, therefore he was effectively discouraging discussion of any kind. It's not a strong point by any stretch of the imagination, but it was a damn sight more suspicious than anything BM or Untitled or even you had done at that point.

Your second vote is because of Cephrir's comment about a vote being a will to lynch. That's not 100% true in my opinion, votes can be more versatile than that, but you don't really explain why it's a scumtell, and you switch your vote.

Cephrir's comment blipped my bullshitometer enough that I felt a vote for additional pressure was warranted (particularly in comparison to my Netlava vote which wasn't accomplishing anything), but not hard enough that I was willing to push for a full-fledged wagon before I got more info from the horse's mouth.

Your third vote is silly and opportunistic, basically you putting words in my mouth to paint me even scummier than others already have been doing.

"You're putting words in my mouth" is a completely worthless argument that has no business in Mafia. Players, particularly scum players, don't always say what they mean; as such, inferring an unspoken motive for any given post is a very legitimate method of hunting scum. If you'd like to disprove the motive I inferred you had for accusing PeterGriffin of OMGUS, by all means, but "I never said that I had that motive" does precisely nothing to convince me that I'm wrong.

As for how I came to that conclusion: PeterGriffin's attack on you in post 345 has no obvious connection to you insulting him in post 101, and you didn't do anything that showed them to be connected, nor did you show anything he said to be wrong. It smacked of trying to use post 101 as a "get out of suspicion free" card.

[Erratus Apathos]

You know what I mean. A vote in this Day 1 is likely to be more thought out than your standard random vote and probably has some actual suspicion behind it.

Okay... but why would you feel the need to say this in response to Untitled's 211? It was really obvious that his declaring an ITV on BM wasn't random.

[StrangerCoug]

OK, I'm back. Here's the player review that I said I'd do so I have people other than Battle Mage to look at. This took a very long time, but I feel it's well worth it.

armlx:

His first post attacks both the pact and Battle Mage's multiposting. Decides to look at the nhat vs. Peter Griffin case, then FoS's the latter and wolframnhart and votes DynamoXI, presumably for a reason having to do with the pact (I typed this up while looking at each post in isolation, though I also opened another tab with all the posts). He then chips in on the Battle Mage vs. StrangerCoug case, largely on me. Questions nhat's soft claim accusation, then says nhat is confusing a slip with a soft claim. Goes back to me, this time regarding my case against Snaps_the_Pirate. Returns to nhat's case and says soft claims are OK. Asks MafiaMann whether he has opinions or just anecdotal comments. Questions nhat's accusing PeterGriffin of OMGUS, then proceeds to vote the former for misrepresentation. Shifts his attention to cris150 for one vote, then returns to nhat. Buys his case and switches his vote back to DynamoXI for jumping on the pact wagon. Explains to Cass that nhat's first two votes were weak and the third strong. Engages in a discussion about whether votes are necessarily an intent to lynch and argues that it should given the long pregame. Voices an objection to Battle Mage's multiposting, briefly goes back to Battle Mage vs. StrangerCoug, then discusses vote switches with Erratos Apathos. armlx leans pro-town to me.

Cass:

Decides not to trust anybody about the pact at first, then not to engage in discussion about the pact. FoS's nhat because his soft claim accusation doesn't make sense and votes me for hypocrisy and badly stretched logic. Disagrees that soft claiming is a tell. Explains what she thinks is my "badly stretched logic". Asks DynamoXI why he's so hesitant to vote. Votes nhat for creating a distraction with a weak case. Attacks the vote hopping accusation on her by saying she's only voted for nhat and me. I want to say that she's town.

Cephrir:

A lot of his early discussion is about the pact. Announces that he hopes scum joins the pact (this is where I'm getting that scum will infiltrate the pact, BTW). A lot of his discussion about the pact is with Opposed Force. Tells Untitled that "we're all out to get you", then votes him in his next post for craplogic. FoS's nhat for WIFOM and thinking a soft claim is a scumtell, and asks him to look up Too Townie. Decides to vote nhat given that he doesn't want to sift through the game to quote Battle Mage for truth and that Untitled wasn't as bad as he once thought. Attacks Erratos Apathos's voting him because vote = intent to lynch doesn't apply on Day 1 by saying this game is an exception, then votes him two posts later for reasons that I can't exactly make out. Cephrir leans on the scummy side to me.

cerebus3:

Very weak reason if any for voting Untitled. His replacement had better clean up his act.

cris150:

I have a null read on this person as she hasn't contributed much as of yet, but she has gotten attention from armlx to an extent, Battle Mage, Cyberbob, nhat, Untitled, and me, with the latter two of us her suspicions. She has posted a PBPA up to post 330.

Cyberbob:

Implies that he is against the pact. FoS's me based on post #254 and votes Netlava given post #88 and that he hasn't posted much content. Pretty good case on nhat. Voices a dislike of Cass's vote on nhat, but doesn't say why. States that he wouldn't be attacking nhat so much if he weren't acting like a crybaby, but that he is "not going to buy into anything else" until Netlava defends CB's vote on NL. Says that he doesn't object to Netlava's attacking the pact discussion, but rather that he agrees with it after having just done so. I'm getting a town vibe off this guy.

DynamoXI:

Spends a good deal of the pre-game discussing the pact. FoS's nhat for horrible logic. Brings up my "quality, not quantity" argument and dismisses my buying PeterGriffin's defense for his random vote given my unusual-to-this-site other Mafia experience online as what I interpret as a lame excuse to clear him, and FoS's me for both. Defends his not voting as wanting a strong case on someone first. Buys nhat's case on Erratos Apathos and votes the latter. The vote looks like one of appeasement, however, and I already told him that if he doubted my Mafia experiences outside this site he could look them up on my MafiaWiki page.

FoS: DynamoXI

earthworm:

Tells me he sees no problem with extended pre-game discussion, then takes a stance against the pact. Thinks that people who join it without reason are more likely lazy town than scum. Responds to my prediction of someone voting me for not wanting pre-game discussion with a wish he listened to me. Votes nhat because he finds his voting Untitled suspicious. Unvotes three posts later, but still suspects him given he's trying to deflect his case on him by attacking Erratos Apathos. Says he isn't defending Netlava so much as disagreeing with Cyberbob's case on Netlava. Accuses Cephrir of vote hopping. earthworm is acting pro-town here.

Erratos Apathos:

Predicts that the pact will implode four pages into Day 1. Shoots down my accusing Battle Mage of not posting a lot of content in the pregame. Asks Snaps_the_Pirate when I said I wanted to lynch Battle Mage. Asks why I think animorpherv1 is scum for placing a random vote. Votes Cephrir because, according to EA, Day 1 votes never imply an intent to lynch, then switches his vote to nhat for post #101. Says town wouldn't change their mind more than once. Dismisses the argument "you're putting words in my mouth" as worthless and having no business in Mafia. I'm glad I directed my attention away from Battle Mage to take a look at everybody else, because these vote reasons are HORRENDOUS. Not only that, but a pro-town player can and does change his mind more than once, and it is indeed wrong to put words in someone's mouth.

Unvote: Battle Mage

and

vote: Erratos Apathos

.

Korts:

The majority of the pre-game is one-liners, but he does voice suspicion of the pact. Ironically, he forms his own pact to fight it. Admits to sitting on the fence in terms of the pact. Votes wolframnhart for the same reason that armlx voted DynamoXI. Attacks my case against Battle Mage by saying that 15 out of 73 posts lacking quality is not enough to accuse him of it. Attacks nhat's soft claim accusation by saying everyone claims to be pro-town. His minimal contribution gives me a scum vibe; however, I'll give him the chance to come up with some decent cases when he comes back from V/LA.

MafiaMann:

Of his six posts other than his confirmation, four are one-liners. Objects to the treaty. Asks if I think Battle Mage is scum or my best option. Says that the way a case is presented can help or hurt a player. Asks if nhat suspects Cyberbob (who thinks MafiaMann meant Erratos Apathos) solely because the latter has a case against the former. I need to see more contribution from this guy if I am to believe he is pro-town.

IGMEOY: MafiaMann

.

maxwellhouse:

Disagrees that using the first person plural is a scum tell. Says that pressure votes Day 1, even in a game like this, are possible. Says that, as of 4:43:54 PM MDT on August 21, nhat is the only person anywhere near a lynch with five votes. Argues that some people aren't going to read the pre-game since it's before the actual game. What little he has said so far makes me believe he is town at this moment.

Mr. T:

Post, damn it! All you've done is confirm!

Netlava:

Objects to the pact and FoS's PeterGriffin and earthworm for arguing over it and me for asking not to post in the pre-game. Votes PeterGriffin because pointing out objectionable behavior ≠ stifling discussion. Clears his suspicion of my not wanting pre-game discussion as it being in tune with my play style. Attacks PeterGriffin's question about my play style and why it excuses me from being hypocritical as loaded. Suspects Cephrir. Votes Cass for arbitrarily calling nhat's case a distraction. Frowns on earthworm buddying up to him. I don't like Netlava's vote switch, and my FoS on him at #405 stands, but I will downgrade it to a

minor FoS: Netlava

if only because most of his other posts are reasonable.

nhat:

Appears to be anti-pact. Accuses PeterGriffin of being overeager. Votes Untitled for softclaiming. Says that using the first person plural is Too Townie. Dismisses PeterGriffin's vote on him as OMGUS. Says that the pact was a farce. Votes Erratos Apathos for vote hopping and flimsy reasons for his vote. His early play and overall being a jerk warrants an

FoS: nhat

, but I think he's cleaned up his act since.

OpposedForce:

Objects to the pact and FoS's everybody in it. He engages in a lengthy discussion of the pact with Battle Mage, and it's not until post #227 that he shifts his attention away from it. Votes cerebus3 for skimming the thread and going with whatever's easy for him in lieu of actual scumhunting. Switches his votes to Cass after a reread because, contrary to what she said, not everybody has flimsy cases against people. Says she voted me on her own merit but is now going with the flow and being lazy. OpposedForce is acting pro-town to me.

PeterGriffin:

Starts off neutral in regards to the pact. He accuses OpposedForce of going to extremes with his FoS on everybody in it; on the other hand, he also FoS's DynamoXI for being too eager to join the pact. Shows no initial objection to my saying that discussion should wait until the game starts, but says such discussion is pro-town if started early. Explains the pact to earthworm and says the pact will only be as effective as the alignments of the players within it, so is hesitant to support it. By the time he discusses it with Netlava, he has become slightly anti-pact. States that nhat has been making

argumenta ad hominem

against Battle Mage and the people talking about the pact. FoS's MafiaMann for hypocrisy. Accuses Untitled of threatening to vote Battle Mage for no solid reason, then votes the former for craplogic, then switches to nhat for the same reason as for Untitled and thinking Too Townie is a scumtell. PeterGriffin seems very rational, and I'm OK with him for now.

raider8169:

Pro-pact, but other than that I can't get anything off him.

Snaps_the_Pirate:

Appears to be anti-pact. Implies that I want to get rid of the most talkative player even though I didn't think the player in question was scum at the time. Defends my voting him as his questioning my case on Battle Mage rather than his making a case against me and accuses me of OMGUS (and StP has never voted, mind you). Questions my motivation to vote him. I still don't like his blowing my case out of proportion, and OMGUS only exists when player A votes player B solely because the vice versa happened, so I'm dismissing his accusation here as misrepresentation.

FoS: Snaps_the_Pirate

Tovarish:

Same as Mr. T.

Untitled:

Anti-pact. Lots of discussion about it with Battle Mage et al. and votes Battle Mage for multiple reasons that I'm going to boil down as misrepresentation. Argues that using the first person plural is not softclaiming. Attacks the Too Townie argument as contravening the definition of "scum tell". Says that "I disagree" ≠ craplogic and "generally" allows for exceptions to the rule. I pretty much follow him, and I think he's town.

Veronica13:

Agrees with PeterGriffin about Netlava. Attacks nhat's reasoning as misguided and votes him, then switches to Cass for a lazy reason to vote nhat. I'm neutral on her (I presume Veronica13 is female given her username), but she is levelheaded.

winterbells/animorpherv1:

winterbells never posted. animorpherv1 random votes PeterGriffin and explains it as being from another site (which I am too), and then votes nhat on heresay about his softclaiming. This is the only three things he has done, and he doesn't seem to be trying to participate.

HoS: animopherv1

.

wolframnhart/hasdgfas:

wolframnhart wonders why people should form a pact to kill off people in a pact, but agrees with the latter one. hasdgfas comes in and votes DynamoXI based on post #58. Unvotes given that he shouldn't have voted if he hasn't caught up to everybody yet. Most of what he brings up is pretty good; however, I'm going to go neutral on hasdgfas until he's on the same page as everybody else. However,

mod: hasdgfas is not marked in the first post as replacing wolframnhart.

[Cyberbob]

Says that he doesn't object to Netlava's attacking the pact discussion, but rather that he agrees with it after having just done so.

Reading comprehension FTW. My vote on him is for his turning around and buying into the discussion after having just attacked it, not for the attack itself.

[raider8169]

Sorry you dont have much on me. That will change. I hate missing all that time I missed alot that you posted.

You get points in my book for taking the time to do that, not that it means anything right now.

[StrangerCoug]

Says that he doesn't object to Netlava's attacking the pact discussion, but rather that he agrees with it after having just done so.

Reading comprehension FTW. My vote on him is for his turning around and buying into the discussion after having just attacked it, not for the attack itself.

Sorry.

[Cyberbob]

That's OK. ^_^

[Erratus Apathos]

Erratos Apathos:

Predicts that the pact will implode four pages into Day 1. Shoots down my accusing Battle Mage of not posting a lot of content in the pregame. Asks Snaps_the_Pirate when I said I wanted to lynch Battle Mage. Asks why I think animorpherv1 is scum for placing a random vote. Votes Cephrir because, according to EA, Day 1 votes never imply an intent to lynch, then switches his vote to nhat for post #101. Says town wouldn't change their mind more than once. Dismisses the argument "you're putting words in my mouth" as worthless and having no business in Mafia. I'm glad I directed my attention away from Battle Mage to take a look at everybody else, because these vote reasons are HORRENDOUS. Not only that, but a pro-town player can and does change his mind more than once, and it is indeed wrong to put words in someone's mouth.

Unvote: Battle Mage

and

vote: Erratos Apathos

.

The "town wouldn't change their mind more than once" bit was sarcasm, and certainly not a point I'd try to seriously push given that I've been changing my mind more than anyone else here.

Regarding the "putting words in mouths" thing: do we really need to have the exact same discussion we had in Mini 601 when I put words in veerus's mouth? Not only that, but after that discussion, you accepted my point of view. Why don't you now?

[StrangerCoug]

Yes I do remember. I'd have to go back and check the discussion in Mini 601 (which is finished, so the mod can't kill us for talking about it), but I don't remember this argument being in the same context as in Mini 601.

[StrangerCoug]

OK, Erratos Apathos, I just finished looking at Mini 601, and it appears I bought your defending putting words in veerus's mouth in that game because I understood it was a joke. Are you saying your putting words in nhat's mouth is a joke as well?

[skitzer]

Citizen Karne will replace Tovarish.
Mr. T will be replaced.
cerebus3 has requested replacement.

Vote Count Six of Day One

(4) nhat: PeterGriffin, Erratus Apathos, animorpherv1, Cass
(4) Erratus Apathos: nhat, DynamoXI, Cephrir, StrangerCoug
(3) Cass: Netlava, Veronica13, OpposedForce
(1) Battle Mage: Untitled
(1) DynamoXI: armlx
(1) Untitled: cerebus3
(1) Netlava: Cyberbob
(1) wolframnhart: Korts
(1) StrangerCoug: Battle Mage

(9) Not Voting: raider8169, cris150, Mr. T, maxwellhouse, Citizen Karne, MafiaMann, Snaps_The_Pirate, earthworm, hasdgfas

With 26 alive, it takes 14 votes to lynch!

Last Post Count Six of Day One

Key:
Green - posted in last 24 hours
Yellow - posted in last 48 hours
Orange - Posted in last 72 hours
Red - Posted more than 72 hours ago, prodded
Dark Red - Requiring Replacement
Dark Blue - Vacation/Limited Access

OpposedForce

cris150

StrangerCoug

nhat

earthworm

Cyberbob

hasdgfas

Netlava

Cass

Battle Mage

maxwellhouse

raider8169

Erratus Apathos

animorpherv1

Untitled

armlx

Snaps_The_Pirate

Veronica13

MafiaMann

DynamoXI

Cephrir

Korts

cerebus3

Mr. T

PeterGriffin

Citizen Karne

[StrangerCoug]

Mr. T:

Post, damn it! All you've done is confirm!

Tovarish:

Same as Mr. T.

So much for those...

[Battle Mage]

The first two people I want to look at are Battle Mage and Untitled. I think we can safely forgo random voting.

why?

You were the first two people I was looking at when I made that post. I didn't want the long pre-game that we ended up having, but then again, there's a decent amount of information in there.

That seems rather contradictory. Why did you feel you could 'safely forgo random voting', and subsequently name 2 'suspects', one of whom you declared 4 posts later to be probably protown, and in fact, NOT a suspect?
It seems just like a transparent attempt to bandwagon somebody with little reason. I believe they call it 'Appealing to Stupidity'.

By saying I'm "appealing to stupidity" you've reduced yourself to being insulting. A 10-page pre-game with a lot of discussion may not be something I'm used to, but I fail to understand how that translates into a random voting stage once it's actually Day 1.

I actually agree with you here. But you still haven't explained why you opted to single me out, and perhaps more importantly, TRY TO HIDE THIS BY NAMING AN ADDITIONAL 'SUSPECT'. And ftr, a vote based on no reasoning except personal dislike, is, for all intents and purposes, random.

I think Untitled has done a good job defending his actions for the most part. I am more suspicious of Battle Mage and his pact. First off, I want to say the pact is a null tell, but it's more accurate to say it's misleading to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact. The pact simply won't work, as it's too easy to infiltrate.

Also, 73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it, either. Mafia is largely a game of quality, not quantity.

Vote: Battle Mage

4 posts ago, you said that you wanted to look at Untitled. Evidently this was just an attempt to conceal an obvious attempt at tunnel-vision right?

This is delayed OMGUS since you lost the mental "convince the StrangerCoug" battle in my head. I believed Untitled more than you, so watch your step.

Rofl. If i was Armlx, i'd probably say something along the lines of 'Stop wanking', or something equally droll. I'm at least glad you concede that your suspicion of me was solely OMGUS, but seriously... threats? Did you even BOTHER to look where my vote is? 0.o

Ad lapidem

again.

Avoiding a non-existent question? really?

Buddy, in my mind, you are probably scum. At this point, you voting for me is reassuring. It means you're scared enough of me to pit yourself directly against me, which means i am doing my job.

This is tunnel vision and appealing to fear.

For something to be an 'appeal to' anything, it has to be directed at an audience. The fact i was talking directly to you, means that the only person i could be appealing to is you. Do you think i was trying to make you scared of yourself?
And for something to be tunnel-vision, it has to involve some sort of scumhunting and analysis. I merely stated that i felt you were scummy, and thus, was not especially worried at you OMGUSing me. lol

Another point i will make is that it is typically scum who look at games as simply as to say 'i believe 1 side over the other'. It's normally townies who actually look at the content and can differentiate between the two. This is mainly because townies actually care about who they lynch and for what reason, whereas scum just want to pick the winning side of the argument and cruise to the end.

But, whilst i'm here, i'll point out that the "misleading" thing is that you clearly haven't actually READ the pact. If you had, you wouldnt make comments like, "to vote people based on who is and is not in the pact".

Give me three useful pro-town purposes of the pact

or

I'm dismissing this argument

as WIFOM

done as an attempt to make me look bad

.

ROFLMAO! It's like you aren't reading what i'm saying. This isn't anywhere

NEAR

WIFOM. It's a fact. You havent read the pact, yet you take it upon yourself to slander it. Skimmy is Scummy. You don't even try to deny this, which proves my point. Maybe you should read it, so you can retract your points, and perhaps save some of your dignity? But far be it from me to make your life easier.

If I hadn't read the pact, I wouldn't have objected to the goddamn thing.

This is why i'm attacking your comments. You cannot say objecting to something you haven't actually read, is a protown thing to do.

Other responses:

Underlined:

Only defensive scum will see everything that is said against them as an 'argument'. In fact, in this case it wasn't, but because you instantly see me as the aggressor who is making you look bad, your OMGUS-dar is on overdrive and you cant help but consider it 'war'.

If anything, we have each other's attention.

What?

Italics:

You really don't need any help on that score. You've dug a big enough hole for yourself that we can bury you now. Keep going and we'll have enough graves for your buddies too!

Tunnel vision again.

This falls into the same category as your failed attempt at labelling tunnel-vision earlier.

Orange:

Because i relish making you look the fool, i accept your challenge, however off the wall it was.

1. It brings certain players to the forefront much like you would expect from the traditional 'case and bandwagon' style of Mafia. Those players can be assessed more easily, and it prevents them lurking to victory.

2. For the first day at least, scum dont know what to make of it. Everybody has an opinion on it, and it makes a great starting discussion topic to get the game moving. We get people taking sides, which we can really assess later on.

3. If implemented, it would allow us to move bandwagons quickly, keeping the scum on their toes. How they'd react is interesting and i think we could learn alot from who followed orders unconditionally, who did what was in their heart, and what people's limits were.

1 and 3 I'll buy, but 2 doesn't answer my infiltration concern.

Your infiltration concern is flawed because the pact is as much a method of creating a scumhunting system, as a scumhunting system in itself. But again, until you've actually read the treaty, there's not alot else i can do to help you.

And if there was any chance of you salvaging any credibility, you lost it when you said "73 posts in the pre-game and not a lot of substance to go with it". Are you kidding me? Name somebody who provided more 'substance' in the first 10 pages of the game. And hell, in your words, it's the fricking PRE-GAME. What sort of content do you want??

Jesus christ.... BM

Content that's not confusing based on my prior experiences, which in the pre-game is everything besides confirmations. I'll accept a little bit of small talk, but it really took off, and I'm used to Day 1 starting somewhere on page 1 or 2. Not page 10.

Hi. I'm BM. I'm a little different to people you might have met before. I don't always do what everyone else does. I can be a bit wacky. I'm really sorry if you have such trouble with things being different, but it's the only way you can really learn in Mafia. But you still haven't answered my question. What did you mean by 'not alot of substance'? And no, i won't accept the "I get confused easily, and anything i don't understand doesn't count as participation'.

By "not a lot of substance" I mean "filler". And where on Earth did you get "anything I don't understand doesn't count as participation"? If I'm slandering you as you say I am, then you're slandering me back, and this is a lose-lose proposition unless we can settle our differences.

Those are two completely different things. I can give you 12 pages of filler, but if i have 12 pages of content to go with it, i still have alot of substance. You said the content i posted was confusing, which explains why you didn't read it, and you also indicated that this content 'didnt count'. You seem to be under the impression this is solely personal. It is partially, but you are acting scummy, and i never back down from an argument when i know i am right.

Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?

1 word. Actually, i'll make it even easier. 2 syllables:

PRE-GAME.

This is question dodging by means of

argumentum ad lapidem

.

Lol, long word! I'm impressed. In fact, i'm almost inclined to look it up.

Then do so.

Why should i do you the honour of taking your comments seriously when you cant even be bothered to respond to mine?

Were it not for the fact that...

THE QUESTION WAS NOT POSED TO ME IN THE FIRST PLACE, SO HOW THE HELL CAN YOU ACCUSE ME OF DODGING IT?

It may have been, but I was willing to allow anybody to answer.

Oh, gee, thanks! Ya kno, for lettin me play and stuff.
I must've missed the announcement that you were appointed Moderator....

The question was not directed to me, hence you cannot accuse me of avoiding it. By not acknowledging this, it is you who is avoiding the question. lawl

Geez man, you need help. Seriously. The fact you can quote clever things shows you do have something going on in that head of yours. I just don't see why it can't be transferred to this game?

I'll explain my point a little more to help you out. You were the guy who said that participation in the pre-game was bad.

Find where I did so, because I remember making no such post.

Use the search posts by player tool, and read the first few posts you made. I dont have the time or inclination to bottle-feed you.

Now, this is a million miles from a case of 'is quality better than quantity', because you are offering NEITHER. It's not like you have a leg to stand on when you attack me for lack of content, because even if only 1 word in each of my 73 posts was useful, and every single word you typed was awesomeness personified, you would still be inferior in terms of quality of posting. And sadly, this is far from the case.

Your question itself seems to be dodging the point in a humourous ironic twist.

Explain my posts not having quality. What do you think about my case on Snaps_the_Pirate, for example?

I'm not talking about since the game has started. I haven't even read past page 11, because there are still unanswered questions about that period. It was THEN that you criticised my lack of participation, and at that point, you had done F*All.

You have already admitted that you:

A. Havent read the most important parts of the game so far.
B. Don't believe in participating unless absolutely necessary.
C. Voted for me solely based on OMGUS.

A. Large games are very hard for me to digest in one go.

Then dont pretend to be aware of whats going on, when you aren't. LaL is by no means a concrete rule, but if you lie about stuff with no protown motive, then you are going to look scummy. Plus it means you end up preaching bs, which makes you look really dumb.

C. You only call it OMGUS because you fail to understand my case on you.

rofl. Actually, i call it OMGUS because that's what you called it.

You really think i'm going to accept YOU telling me that my posts 'suck'?! Dream on kid.

Then prove they don't.

I've created discussion. You hadn't.

Again, you use the word 'case'. Where is the 'case'? I don't see it. You're scum who is barely paying attention.

Goddamn you, why are you so certain this early!? You seem to have made it your mission to get rid of me at all costs. I'm saving the rest of this paragraph for last, and we're almost at the end anyway.

You commit the scumtells, i call you out on them. Fairly mundane stuff.

oh and btw...

Oh My God, U Suck.

Stop ridiculing me.

NEVAR!

Blinded by OMGUS and panic, because you aren't in your comfort zone, and you are slipping up under interrogation, left, right, and centre.

Let's change the subject for just a moment so neither of us end up clawing at each other and winning nothing at the end. I will take a look at the other 24 players in this game and post my opinions of them based on their posts, and I want you to do the same thing. I think we've made it clear that we each think the other is scum, so don't do me and I won't do you.

Sounds good. Analysing everyone at this point is probably a good idea. But, i still want a separate post outlining your case on me. Just for the record.

BM

[MafiaMann]

BM pre gamer

Post ten- proposes “secret” treaty to raiders in joking manner

Post fourteen- BM starts to consider their working together are real possibility

Post fifteen- commenting on korts post about a queer swiss pheasant nothing to read

Post eighteen – BM starts saying he will draw something up possibly the start of the pact

Post twenty-two- BM states his plan is pro town and invites Dynamo in

Post twenty-five- the pact my concern is he says that you can only be allowed in by a unanimous vote than continues to just let people in.

Post twenty eight- starts talking to Korts bout joining forces: At this point I think BM has took it too far and too many people are involved.

Post Thirty- show a little concern about Korts coalition: Not sure if this serious or not.

Post thirty two- I express my concern that pact can shelter scum. BM says pact will be kept small: I still think its too big. Pact members are not safe from other pact members. And again he says more members would be handpicked later on.: What happened to this,

Post thirty four- Korts expressing their concern that this will cause too much of a mob mentality. BM shrugs off the question really.

Post thirty seven- BM asks for a merger with Korts. Making a pact with IMO too many larger.

Fourty two- I am worried how BM is jokingly throwing an fos at Cephir can cause confusion

Fourty three- reposts thirty two

Fourty four- reposts the scumz die now pact with his and Korts name added What happened to dynamo.

Fourty seven- opposed raises a very good point once more BM shrugs the question off

106- BM sounds annoyed with opposed and makes things more complicated than they should be IMO

107- commenting on how he wont lat long in the game

108- BM tells kort hold up and says he would like wolframheart in: Finally BM is doing what he said he would good job.

109- explains how a merger works

113- BM says he wont sell himself to kort

117- attacks opposed logic. Im beginning to lean towards opposed side because im not liking BMs reasoning it seems like he is making things more complicated.

118- says he thinks opposed is scummy This whole thing kind of looks like a big OMGUS.

121- Dismisses earthworms concerns saying no one is safe. The pact is small and has no effect.

122- nothing

125- says his pact is playing mafia and by attacking the pact you are attacking the game I disagree mafia is not anything like the pact.

126- nothing really

128- goes off on how opposed is being irrational and this whole thing is wrong Im still think opposed is on the right track.

129- nothing

132- nothing really

133- at this point BM is just saying that opposed is being stupid

136- more disagreeing with opposed

138- Untitled calls him a distraction BM disagrees

140- says opposed doesn’t know what hes saying

141- nothing

144- says people in the pact are scum basically not making much sense to me

145- nothing

146- says discussion in the pregame is good I do agree with this

151- More opposed and BM arguing

152- says pact is different way of scum hunting

154- agrees with Korts

155- explains how pact is beneficial. Beginning to agree

157- no content

161- BM goes after opposeds argument. As he is getting annoyed his arguments seem worse.

162- ZERO content

163- goes after untitled personally I agree

165- nothing

166- worries about Korts anti pact thing

167- So much multi posting Says peter griffin is playing well; yet again says people in pact not safe from pact

171- goes after untitleds demand for answers

172- asks why untitled is so anti BM

173- thanks cephir for seeing where hes coming from

176 –asks kort what they think bout untitled

178- ask korts how scummy he seems. (he meaning BM)

180- asks korts why the pact makes him suspect BM you are placing yourself right in the middle of everything how can you not be suspect.

182- still trying to find why Korts thinks hes scummy

184- says korts is fencesitting I agree but fence sitting isn’t always scummy

189- no content

190- ends pact finally

195- nothing
197- nothing

199- 0 content

203- says pact was brilliant idea just wasn’t meant to be

204- more garbage

205- when peter griffin has case against me points out flaws in case

207- more battling untitled untitled not looking good to me

209- comments on how peter is on a lot but not posting

213- more attacks on untitled

214- nothing

230- says untitled is tunnel visioning on BM which he is

231- questions untitled on his lack of reasons for attacking BM

234- BM wont be able to post for awhile thank god

[Korts]

Ok, guys, I'm back, just a quick note for now. I knew I could count on you to give me some reading material, so I'll get to it pretty soon.

[Cephrir]

You know what I mean. A vote in this Day 1 is likely to be more thought out than your standard random vote and probably has some actual suspicion behind it.

Okay... but why would you feel the need to say this in response to Untitled's 211? It was really obvious that his declaring an ITV on BM wasn't random.

Because he was saying that his wanting to vote BM didn't indicate a desire to lynch. And also, he called the vote "unreasoned" in relation to this, but given what we already had to go on and what we ended up having before D1 started, that didn't make any sense. Post in question for reference:

I fail to see how this is related to wanting to lynch him. surely a fast, unreasoned vote early in the game is less likely to reflect a genuine desire to lynch somebody?

It's kinda different since we've had almost 10 pages of discussion already. Day 1 votes won't be nearly so random as they normally are.

Moving along...

On the topic of vote-hopping, what do you guys think of this? In five posts, Cephrir made 3 different votes.

Vote: Untitled

for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

Also, same question for Cephrir:

Vote: Untitled for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

I checked your posts and you didn't.

Hum. 'Kay.

And well... BM said a lot for me. Basically I think his viewpoint during that argument was rather illogical, I don't feel like sifting through the 10 pages of pregame just to QFT BM. Untitled isn't actually as bad as he was in my head though. Man, I do that a lot. So, I'd rather pursue my other suspect-of-sorts.

Unvote, Vote: nhat

It's a good EA case, but Cass kinda has a point. I was going to say what she did, but then I read nhat's reply and realized he was right. I still find him scummy but I want to pursue EA for... reasons. Not just nhat's case.

Unvote, Vote EA

It's made worse by the fact that every single one of Cephrir's votes were made onto people who already had bandwagons formed on them, with rarely more justification than was already provided by the bandwagon. I'd like to know what people think, because the only other game I'm playing is being moderated by Cephrir, so I'm having a hard time viewing him impartially.

Fair enough, I suppose I have been vote-hopping a bit. I did FoS nhat in the same post in which I voted Untitled, so it's not like that was a totally unexpected vote. And I don't disagree that I've mostly been voting people who have already had bandwagon; early on in large games I usually don't make a lot of cases or original votes. I play worse in large games for some reason. I stand by the reasoning for my nhat and EA votes.

I would like to see a bigger EA bandwagon, FTR.

Cephrir: A lot of his early discussion is about the pact. Announces that he hopes scum joins the pact (this is where I'm getting that scum will infiltrate the pact, BTW). A lot of his discussion about the pact is with Opposed Force. Tells Untitled that "we're all out to get you", then votes him in his next post for craplogic. FoS's nhat for WIFOM and thinking a soft claim is a scumtell, and asks him to look up Too Townie. Decides to vote nhat given that he doesn't want to sift through the game to quote Battle Mage for truth and that Untitled wasn't as bad as he once thought. Attacks Erratos Apathos's voting him because vote = intent to lynch doesn't apply on Day 1 by saying this game is an exception, then votes him two posts later for reasons that I can't exactly make out. Cephrir leans on the scummy side to me.

This is an accurate summary of what I've done in this game, for the most part. Care to explain why you think it makes me scummy? You kinda did something similar with a lot of people actually. So I'll just ask your entire post: why?

[Battle Mage]

Post twenty-five- the pact my concern is he says that you can only be allowed in by a unanimous vote than continues to just let people in.

Except i don't. That was Korts. At no point did i allow people in officially, and when i finally got to the thread, i emphasised that we would have to vote before people were allowed in.

Post twenty eight- starts talking to Korts bout joining forces: At this point I think BM has took it too far and too many people are involved.

You mean...2? rofl

Post thirty two- I express my concern that pact can shelter scum. BM says pact will be kept small: I still think its too big. Pact members are not safe from other pact members. And again he says more members would be handpicked later on.: What happened to this,

2 people is too big? And in fact, Korts claimed he never officially joined, so the pact never actually had ANY official members. The idea of the pact is to provide the illusion that it can shelter scum, scum then join, and we can assess their play much more than if they were allowed to hide in the shadows.

Post thirty four- Korts expressing their concern that this will cause too much of a mob mentality. BM shrugs off the question really.

There wasn't a question. Korts was worried about whether he could trust me, i said there was little risk because at this stage of the game (pre-random stage) it wasnt as if we were actually going to start rushing through lynches. I should note though, that i do genuinely believe that towns suffer due to lack of united action, and this was probably what led me to come up with the pact idea in the first place. The rest of the benefits were realised later.

Post thirty seven- BM asks for a merger with Korts. Making a pact with IMO too many larger.

I seem to get the impression you are basing the entirety of your misgivings upon an excess of members which do not exist. Please feel free to read again and point out where any member other than Korts was given the unanimous vote (which at that time, was only ME) and allowed into the pact.

Fourty two- I am worried how BM is jokingly throwing an fos at Cephir can cause confusion

It's the random stage. And it was funny to think that Cephrir might have slipped on the locations

Fourty four- reposts the scumz die now pact with his and Korts name added What happened to dynamo.

I dont know. What gave you the impression he would have been admitted?

Fourty seven- opposed raises a very good point once more BM shrugs the question off

Let me just refresh everyone's memory. Opposed's point was 'you will be discussing with scum who might manipulate discussion'. Which, as i pointed out at the time, is exactly what a mafia game IS. If i appeared to shrug off the question, it may have been because i felt it was too retarded for words. Until you understand the concept, it is pretty useless to raise points against it. Of course there is a possibility scum will be involved, and will manipulate things. THAT'S HOW WE CATCH THEM. You dont catch scum without them doing anything scummy, do you? -.-

106- BM sounds annoyed with opposed and makes things more complicated than they should be IMO

I hate blind stupidity. Whether i made it complicated or not, the fact remains that i was right, and he was wrong.

107- commenting on how he wont lat long in the game

The first bit was a private joke with Farside. The second was a general joke based on a recent trend of mine.

108- BM tells kort hold up and says he would like wolframheart in: Finally BM is doing what he said he would good job.

The only reason i hadn't done before, is because I WASN'T THERE.
Even i sleep sometimes..

117- attacks opposed logic. Im beginning to lean towards opposed side because im not liking BMs reasoning it seems like he is making things more complicated.

I've already addressed this above. Complicated or not, Opposed was annoying as hell, and was refusing to answer legitimate concerns.

118- says he thinks opposed is scummy This whole thing kind of looks like a big OMGUS.

If it looks like 'a big OMGUS', you clearly haven't read the content which was posted.

125- says his pact is playing mafia and by attacking the pact you are attacking the game I disagree mafia is not anything like the pact.

Please explain what you mean.

128- goes off on how opposed is being irrational and this whole thing is wrong Im still think opposed is on the right track.

How did you feel when Opposed admitted he was on the wrong track to Korts?

144- says people in the pact are scum basically not making much sense to me

That was Opposed. I was merely relaying his point.

161- BM goes after opposeds argument. As he is getting annoyed his arguments seem worse.

How so?

167- So much multi posting Says peter griffin is playing well; yet again says people in pact not safe from pact

Do you feel that the way my stance on the pact has been totally consistent throughout is scummy, or protown?

180- asks korts why the pact makes him suspect BM you are placing yourself right in the middle of everything how can you not be suspect.

Because i havent done anything SCUMMY. Being in the limelight doesnt make you scummy. It just means you are discussed. The bottom line is, when my play is analysed like this, it brings home how totally protown i am.

182- still trying to find why Korts thinks hes scummy

Notice that Korts claimed i was 'scummy' but didnt give any reasons, falling on the same pedastal as you- that by participating alot, i am more likely to be scum, despite failing to come up with any real scumtells from those posts.

184- says korts is fencesitting I agree but fence sitting isn’t always scummy

True enough, but i see it more often from scum than town, because town has no reason not to commit to opinions.

190- ends pact finally

The pact was already 'ended'. This was just the announcement of it, because apparently not everyone had realised.

205- when peter griffin has case against me points out flaws in case

Scummy or protown?

234- BM wont be able to post for awhile thank god

lol, thanks for the analysis. I anxiously await thoughts from SC, and of course, your responses.

BM

[Snaps_the_Pirate]

Let’s change the subject for just a moment so neither of us end up clawing at each other and winning nothing at the end. I will take a look at the other 24 players in this game and post my opinions of them based on their posts, and I want you to do the same thing. I think we've made it clear that we each think the other is scum, so don't do me and I won't do you.

Wow, does that sound like he is scared of BM?

SrangerCoug has said an awful lot, but has not said very much. He mentions his case on me a few times. What case? He has said nothing for me to defend.

He also talks about being misrepresented, yet he stated I was anti-pact. My only comment on the pact was that it was null and wouldn’t affect the game one way or the other. How is that “anti-pact”? Who is mis-representing who?

StrangerCoug has yet to anwser my simple question “Why did he initially vote BM?”. It’s a very simple and fair question. Yet he has completely ignored it.

Vote StrangerCoug

[Battle Mage]

Okay but I agreed to be the second person on that pact,

Not true. Korts was considered on it, and I'm P sure one other person (Wolf?) was on it too.

this is correct. Dynamo was never officially given the go ahead by either me, or Korts. Sorry dude. Wolf was never approved by Korts, but if the pact still existed, he would probably be in on it.

BM

[Battle Mage]

I'm not going to do a megapost with all of them and I'm too lazy to do links right now, but I can't find anything decent in Battle Mage's #2, #4, #12, #13 (which has a weak reason for an FoS), #18–#21, #24 for the most part, #27, #35, #40, #41, #43, #58, #69 besides the "don't mock" part, and #72 in isolation.

They aren't ALL my posts by a long shot. Korts and EA are spot on with their attack on your hypocrisy.

BM

[Battle Mage]

here it is folks, the moment we've all been waiting for.

vote: battle mage

eh? 0.o