Open 97 - Lovers Mafia (Over in 3 days!) before 703

[JDodge]

Vote: Battousai

Hi scum.

[JDodge]

I call this as Battousai-Guardian. Y'all can go home now.

Battousai jumped on Adel after Flimsy placed the second vote on Guardian, indicating a strong wish to develop a counter-wagon to the Guardian wagon, indicating a clear perservatory link, indicating a clear scumpair. Thanks for playing.

[JDodge]

who the hell took so long to confirm?

jdodge's logic re: battosoi's counterwagon thing is interesting, but I hardly think anyone was going to lynch me page 1, so I'm not sure why battosoi as my partner would do something that obvious. it seems a lil off of jdodge to suggest it cuz hes pretty good. omgus/fos: jdodge.

Your suspicion is based on complete and utter WIFOM based on "if he was my partner, i doubt he'd do anything that obvious". And then suspicion based on "you're better than this".

1. Good is relative. That makes your second point irrelevant.

2. The first is irrelevant. The point is not that he thought someone was going to lynch you, the point is that he wanted to take any possible pressure off of you.

part of me likes battosoi-adel with that second vote, since battosoi could easily have voted someone else, too.

Bullshit. Are you saying that it would've been better if Batt

had

put Adel at -1? You're creating a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" argument here.

btw:

Y'all know the MOS-plan for vengeful or whatever? You select a player to be "MOS" and never lynch them and that improves your chances of winning. A similar strategy applies here I think.

Normal play:
1/3 chance of winning day 1.
2/3 * 2/5 chance of winning day 2
1/3 + 2/3 * 2/5 (4/15) = 9/15

If we select a "MOS"
2/3 town mos:
2/5 chance of winning day 1
3/5 * 1/2 chance of winning day 2
4/10 + 3/10 = 7/10 chance if town mos
7/10 * 2/3 = 7/15

1/3 scum mos:
1/5 chance day 1
4/5 * 1/4 chance day 2
1/5 + 1/5 = 2/10 * 1/3 = 1/15

No. Your second example fully proves why it's a bad idea. Furthermore, since hitting just one scum ends the game in a town win, we need all players as possible plays for the lynch. You're trying to set yourself up into an impenetrable position where you won't be lynched. It's not working. Your bussing attempts are incredibly transparent at this point.

Unvote, vote: Guardian

It's -1, people. Stay wary.

[JDodge]

hm or Battousai jdodge.

that would explain why jdodge's reason for voting Battousai is iffy.

I am never gonna get your name right without copy paste Battousai. Can you come up with a short memorable nickname for yourself?

My reason for Battousai being "iffy" is because it involved a heavy connection to you, and your OMGUS instinct kicked in.

DIESCUMDIE

[JDodge]

who the hell took so long to confirm?

jdodge's logic re: battosoi's counterwagon thing is interesting, but I hardly think anyone was going to lynch me page 1, so I'm not sure why battosoi as my partner would do something that obvious. it seems a lil off of jdodge to suggest it cuz hes pretty good. omgus/fos: jdodge.

Your suspicion is based on complete and utter WIFOM based on "if he was my partner, i doubt he'd do anything that obvious". And then suspicion based on "you're better than this".

1. Good is relative. That makes your second point irrelevant.

how the hell does this follow?

You are using the "Moving the goalpost" fallacy here. I state clear logical grounds (that good in mafia is relative), and you claim it to not follow enough. You originally claim tnat my basis is "not good enough", which is the moving the goalpost bit.

2. The first is irrelevant. The point is not that he thought someone was going to lynch you, the point is that he wanted to take any possible pressure off of you.

thats dumb i can handle the pressure.

That's irrelevant (also no you can't).

part of me likes battosoi-adel with that second vote, since battosoi could easily have voted someone else, too.

Bullshit. Are you saying that it would've been better if Batt

had

put Adel at -1? You're creating a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" argument here.

no it wud be better if he voted a random 3rd person.

K, fine then. That point is irrelevant anyways.

btw:

Y'all know the MOS-plan for vengeful or whatever? You select a player to be "MOS" and never lynch them and that improves your chances of winning. A similar strategy applies here I think.

Normal play:
1/3 chance of winning day 1.
2/3 * 2/5 chance of winning day 2
1/3 + 2/3 * 2/5 (4/15) = 9/15

If we select a "MOS"
2/3 town mos:
2/5 chance of winning day 1
3/5 * 1/2 chance of winning day 2
4/10 + 3/10 = 7/10 chance if town mos
7/10 * 2/3 = 7/15

1/3 scum mos:
1/5 chance day 1
4/5 * 1/4 chance day 2
1/5 + 1/5 = 2/10 * 1/3 = 1/15

No. Your second example fully proves why it's a bad idea. Furthermore, since hitting just one scum ends the game in a town win, we need all players as possible plays for the lynch. You're trying to set yourself up into an impenetrable position where you won't be lynched. It's not working. Your bussing attempts are incredibly transparent at this point.

wtf i never even suggested myself as MOS. stop putting words in my mouth.

Hence the term "setting yourself up". Learn to read.

[quote="Guardian"

My reason for Battousai being "iffy" is because it involved a heavy connection to you, and your OMGUS instinct kicked in.

DIESCUMDIE

No, its iffy cuz it is iffy. him doing that as scum doesnt make any sense.

if it DOES make sense why change your vote to me? cuz me finding your bad reason to be bad is suspicious?[/quote]

Your argument is "It is because it is". Wonderful.

[JDodge]

JDodge is town. This is based on meta. It will additionally be based upon his response to this statement. Let's see where it goes.

I am almost completely apathetic about this statement. A little curious as to why you think I'm town, yet apathetic.

--------------
Vote Count as of post 25:
Guardian-3 (Adel, Lord Gurgi, JDodge)
Adel-1 (SensFan, Battousai)
Battousai-1 (Guardian)

Not voting-0
With 6 alive, it is 4 to lynch.

[JDodge]

I can't see Adel being scum with anyone else.

Is that a slip?

Uhm.

If Adel were scum, she'd have to be scum with someone else.

See the logic here?

[JDodge]

JDodge

is

may be (~65%) town. This is based on meta. It will additionally be based upon his response to this statement. Let's see where it goes.

I am almost completely apathetic about this statement. A little curious as to why you think I'm town, yet apathetic.

Revised.

Batt, that was a very good post to say absolutely nothing.

In other news, why is Guardian still breathing?

Because people are complete pussies.

[JDodge]

In other news, why is Guardian still breathing?

Because its page 2?

What's your point? Why wait to lynch scum when we can do so now?

[JDodge]

Jdodge, from your perspective, did Guardian commit his scumtell yet?

I honestly can barely remember what that tell was. Let me try and remember and I'll get back to you.

[JDodge]

Whatever.

Unvote, Vote: guardian

WOOP WOOP

[JDodge]

JDodge

is

may be (~65%) town. This is based on meta. It will additionally be based upon his response to this statement. Let's see where it goes.

I am almost completely apathetic about this statement. A little curious as to why you think I'm town, yet apathetic.

Revised.

Batt, that was a very good post to say absolutely nothing.

In other news, why is Guardian still breathing?

What I meant was that you basically said, "I think Jdodge is town because of his meta, unless he reacts scummy when I post this." I guess for my post to actually say something like your meaningful "why is Guardian still breathing? post," I should add in: I think you posted the meta/plus disclaimer post so as to appear to side with JDodge, but if he does something scummy you can fall back on and still say you had doubts because of his ambigous response to that post.

No. I have a reliable meta on him. He didn't quite obey it, hence the drop to may be.

Also, weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee hammer on page two.

# of times you've played forum mafia with me: 0
# of times you've played IRC mafia with me: countless

IRC mafia =/= Forum mafia

Hence your meta is invalid.

Yawn.

[JDodge]

7. When you die, you may make a "bah!" post, but nothing game-related.

I expected better, Guardian.

Is he dead yet? No. Why do you want someone who will apparently come up town to shut up?

[JDodge]

7. When you die, you may make a "bah!" post, but nothing game-related.

I expected better, Guardian.

Is he dead yet? No. Why do you want someone who will apparently come up town to shut up?

Sorry, I assumed that the rules prohibited that. I didn't want to violate the rules, if you feel like lynching me for that, there's no hope left for the game.

Why so defensive, Flimsy?

[JDodge]

7. When you die, you may make a "bah!" post, but nothing game-related.

I expected better, Guardian.

Is he dead yet? No. Why do you want someone who will apparently come up town to shut up?

Sorry, I assumed that the rules prohibited that. I didn't want to violate the rules, if you feel like lynching me for that, there's no hope left for the game.

Why so defensive, Flimsy?

Because you lodged a serious accusation at me, why so flippant?

When did I ever accuse you?

I asked you why you wanted someone who will come up town to shut up. I never said anything accusatory.

[JDodge]

if you have any questions for me or comments on my analysis of the game please present it now. I feel about 85% confident in it.

I think lynching Sens is better than lynching Adel thanks to Adel's tendency towards gambitting, meaning that any tells on her are less solid.

[JDodge]

When did I ever accuse you?

I asked you why you wanted someone who will come up town to shut up. I never said anything accusatory.

Welcome to mafia, it is a serious accusation to say I wanted to cut off discussion. I wanted to follow the rules, because I thought he had to stop talking.

No. It is not. It is curiosity. You define it as an accusation because:

A. You were expecting something accusatory from me

B. It nicely takes all discussion involving you off of the "why is JD town to you" thing which you decided to waffle on.

[JDodge]

if you have any questions for me or comments on my analysis of the game please present it now. I feel about 85% confident in it.

I think lynching Sens is better than lynching Adel thanks to Adel's tendency towards gambitting, meaning that any tells on her are less solid.

That sounds like a good excuse to waive off suspicion of Adel.

One scum lynch is worth too. It's playing to confidence instead of playing to likelihood.

Guardian: The issue I have with your Adel theory is that it is based on her information gathering-oriented playstyle. Are you arguing that your lynch will

not

gain us more information than discussing things ad nauseum?

[JDodge]

wait -- also -- SF, what reason did you have to vote me, if any?

2 people were calling for a hammer so I went back and looked at your play thus far. I didn't like you trying to make someone unlynchable, but I thought maybe it was Adel/JDodge scumpair. When Gurgi also called for a hammer, I knew that at least one of them was Town, so I hammered

so one or two townies and one or two scum wanted me hammered... ergo you hammered?

you say you looked at my play -- what if anything was suspicious about it?

I found you suspicious, but not suspicious enough to hammer with potentially only the Scum calling for a lynch. When Gurgi chimed in, I knew there was at least one Town person comfortable with your lynch, so I hammered.

As I said, I really didn't like the whole MOS thing.

There were 3 people voting him. Of course there was at least one town person comfortable with the lynch.

Don't get me wrong, the lynch was just what this game needed to get kick-started - but your pretense for hammering is bullshit.

[JDodge]

wait -- also -- SF, what reason did you have to vote me, if any?

2 people were calling for a hammer so I went back and looked at your play thus far. I didn't like you trying to make someone unlynchable, but I thought maybe it was Adel/JDodge scumpair. When Gurgi also called for a hammer, I knew that at least one of them was Town, so I hammered

so one or two townies and one or two scum wanted me hammered... ergo you hammered?

you say you looked at my play -- what if anything was suspicious about it?

I found you suspicious, but not suspicious enough to hammer with potentially only the Scum calling for a lynch. When Gurgi chimed in, I knew there was at least one Town person comfortable with your lynch, so I hammered.

As I said, I really didn't like the whole MOS thing.

There were 3 people voting him. Of course there was at least one town person comfortable with the lynch.

Don't get me wrong, the lynch was just what this game needed to get kick-started - but your pretense for hammering is bullshit.

I don't consider a page 1 vote as comfortable with a lynch.

Because people yelling "LYNCH HIM" on page 1 is somehow more serious?

[JDodge]

When did I ever accuse you?

I asked you why you wanted someone who will come up town to shut up. I never said anything accusatory.

Welcome to mafia, it is a serious accusation to say I wanted to cut off discussion. I wanted to follow the rules, because I thought he had to stop talking.

No. It is not. It is curiosity. You define it as an accusation because:

A. You were expecting something accusatory from me

B. It nicely takes all discussion involving you off of the "why is JD town to you" thing which you decided to waffle on.

I followed that through, I ignored your 'curiosity' because I think it's a load of garbage. Also, JDodge, you're an accusatory person, I read your posts with your aggressive personality in mind.

Selective perception.

if you have any questions for me or comments on my analysis of the game please present it now. I feel about 85% confident in it.

I think lynching Sens is better than lynching Adel thanks to Adel's tendency towards gambitting, meaning that any tells on her are less solid.

That sounds like a good excuse to waive off suspicion of Adel.

One scum lynch is worth too. It's playing to confidence instead of playing to likelihood.

Guardian: The issue I have with your Adel theory is that it is based on her information gathering-oriented playstyle. Are you arguing that your lynch will

not

gain us more information than discussing things ad nauseum?

Didn't answer my question, try again.

Questions are generally ended with a question mark. Where was your question again?

[JDodge]

sensfan -- it wud have been nice to say you were suspicious of me, and why, and let me respond to it -- before hammering.

not doing so is uberscumzie

Fair enough, though I think everyone on the wagon is just as accountable for the fact you were lynched as I was, since they were all calling for a lynch.

Hello tomorrow's lynch.

[JDodge]

sensfan -- it wud have been nice to say you were suspicious of me, and why, and let me respond to it -- before hammering.

not doing so is uberscumzie

Fair enough, though I think everyone on the wagon is just as accountable for the fact you were lynched as I was, since they were all calling for a lynch.

Hello tomorrow's lynch.

Hey unilateral decision and planning, now you're tilting scum, good job.

Hi deal with it, bitch.

[JDodge]

sensfan -- it wud have been nice to say you were suspicious of me, and why, and let me respond to it -- before hammering.

not doing so is uberscumzie

Fair enough, though I think everyone on the wagon is just as accountable for the fact you were lynched as I was, since they were all calling for a lynch.

Hello tomorrow's lynch.

Had I been voting him and not you, would you have hammered?

Yes, because I'd have thought it a well-reasoned hammer instead of pandering to the masses.

It's Sens-Flimsy. Calling this now.

[JDodge]

sensfan -- it wud have been nice to say you were suspicious of me, and why, and let me respond to it -- before hammering.

not doing so is uberscumzie

Fair enough, though I think everyone on the wagon is just as accountable for the fact you were lynched as I was, since they were all calling for a lynch.

Hello tomorrow's lynch.

Had I been voting him and not you, would you have hammered?

Yes, because I'd have thought it a well-reasoned hammer instead of pandering to the masses.

It's Sens-Flimsy. Calling this now.

So I am scummy for doing something that you would have done in my spot, because I waited to see if it would have the approval of at least 1 Town person?

You're scummy for hammering someone on a case you didn't believe in on the basis of pandering to the majority.

If you are by any obscene stretch of the imagination town, you are strictly advised to grow a pair.

[JDodge]

You're scummy for hammering someone on a case you didn't believe in on the basis of pandering to the majority.

Now see, that's complete bullshit. Do I need to point out the (now 4) times I've said I found him scummy?

More to the point, stop avoiding the question. Why am I scummy for doing something you would have done, but waiting to make sure at least 1 other Town person agrees?

I've answered your question multiple times. You only showed suspicion after the fact, AND only showed enough suspicion to hammer once

you precieved that it was safe to do so, because a majority makeup of the town tomorrow agreed with you.

.

[JDodge]

You're scummy for hammering someone on a case you didn't believe in on the basis of pandering to the majority.

Now see, that's complete bullshit. Do I need to point out the (now 4) times I've said I found him scummy?

More to the point, stop avoiding the question. Why am I scummy for doing something you would have done, but waiting to make sure at least 1 other Town person agrees?

I've answered your question multiple times. You only showed suspicion after the fact, AND only showed enough suspicion to hammer once

you precieved that it was safe to do so, because a majority makeup of the town tomorrow agreed with you.

.

Answer the question.

I HAVE ANSWERED THE GODDAMN FUCKING QUESTION AT LEAST 5 FUCKING TIMES BY NOW. LEARN HOW TO READ OR CEASE TO PLAY THE GAME. THANKS.

Yeah, I only hammered after 3 other people voted for him. Real good scumtell there!

Vote =/= call for the hammer; you yourself said that page 1 votes were pretty much meaningless.

[JDodge]

Yeah, I only hammered after 3 other people voted for him. Real good scumtell there!

Vote =/= call for the hammer; you yourself said that page 1 votes were pretty much meaningless.

Right. But you are saying that I'm Scum for hammering only with support of 50%+ of the Town. Surely that is the case for any hammer...

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

[JDodge]

I HAVE ANSWERED THE GODDAMN FUCKING QUESTION AT LEAST 5 FUCKING TIMES BY NOW. LEARN HOW TO READ OR CEASE TO PLAY THE GAME. THANKS.

No. You have made a statement that is a sad attempt to weasel out of self-incrimination.

No. I've answered the question.

Isn't this fun? It's like a long and more wordy version of the classic "NO YOU NO YOU NO YOU" exchange.

[JDodge]

Yeah, I only hammered after 3 other people voted for him. Real good scumtell there!

Vote =/= call for the hammer; you yourself said that page 1 votes were pretty much meaningless.

Right. But you are saying that I'm Scum for hammering only with support of 50%+ of the Town. Surely that is the case for any hammer...

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

I would never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town supporting it.

Then again, if by some obscene stretch of the imagination you

are

town, you are henceforth urged to grow a pair.

[JDodge]

JDodge, explain why what you are arguing is not a situation of "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't."

If he had just hammered (with an actual reason), then he could deliver a logical explanation and thus not come under suspicion. There is no logical reason beyond self-preservation to wait until he saw people wanted a hammer and then do so.

[JDodge]

Yeah, I only hammered after 3 other people voted for him. Real good scumtell there!

Vote =/= call for the hammer; you yourself said that page 1 votes were pretty much meaningless.

Right. But you are saying that I'm Scum for hammering only with support of 50%+ of the Town. Surely that is the case for any hammer...

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

I would never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town supporting it.

Then again, if by some obscene stretch of the imagination you

are

town, you are henceforth urged to grow a pair.

I have been Town before, you realize? And why should anyone end the day without a majority agreeing for a lynch? Why should my opinion override that of the majority?

If you have a good reason to hammer, then hammer already; you can justify it later. You are human. You are fallible. You are likely to be wrong. That should not stop you in the least.

However, when you try to remove self-accountability, that in and of itself is suspicious.

[JDodge]

JDodge, explain why what you are arguing is not a situation of "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't."

If he had just hammered (with an actual reason), then he could deliver a logical explanation and thus not come under suspicion. There is no logical reason beyond self-preservation to wait until he saw people wanted a hammer and then do so.

What would your reasons to hammer be?

I saw the clear percieved link between Guardian and Batt. I was certain from Guardian's reaction he was scum. That would've been my reason. Again, human, fallible, wrong, mistakes, etc.

[JDodge]

Yeah, I only hammered after 3 other people voted for him. Real good scumtell there!

Vote =/= call for the hammer; you yourself said that page 1 votes were pretty much meaningless.

Right. But you are saying that I'm Scum for hammering only with support of 50%+ of the Town. Surely that is the case for any hammer...

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

I would never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town supporting it.

Then again, if by some obscene stretch of the imagination you

are

town, you are henceforth urged to grow a pair.

I have been Town before, you realize? And why should anyone end the day without a majority agreeing for a lynch? Why should my opinion override that of the majority?

If you have a good reason to hammer, then hammer already; you can justify it later. You are human. You are fallible. You are likely to be wrong. That should not stop you in the least.

However, when you try to remove self-accountability, that in and of itself is suspicious.

Why should the person who happens to not be voting someone be more accountable than the 3 people who are calling for a hammer, but happen to be voting that person?

You're ignoring my point and arguing the basis surrounding the point.

I am not saying that I am unaccountable. I am not saying that any of us who called for the hammer are any less accountable than you are. I am saying that your waiting until you had that safety net of 3 other people having as much accountability as you is suspicious.

[JDodge]

JDodge, explain why what you are arguing is not a situation of "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't."

If he had just hammered (with an actual reason), then he could deliver a logical explanation and thus not come under suspicion. There is no logical reason beyond self-preservation to wait until he saw people wanted a hammer and then do so.

What would your reasons to hammer be?

I saw the clear percieved link between Guardian and Batt. I was certain from Guardian's reaction he was scum. That would've been my reason. Again, human, fallible, wrong, mistakes, etc.

Excusing yourself from a lynch, etc.

YES BECAUSE I AM NEVER WRONG

Get over your selective perception, Flimsy.

[JDodge]

YES BECAUSE I AM NEVER WRONG

Get over your selective perception, Flimsy.

This would appear to be the basis of your mafia play.

My, your little psyche is full of cognitive biases, isn't it?

[JDodge]

Vote =/= call for the hammer; you yourself said that page 1 votes were pretty much meaningless.

Right. But you are saying that I'm Scum for hammering only with support of 50%+ of the Town. Surely that is the case for any hammer...

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

I would never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town supporting it.

Then again, if by some obscene stretch of the imagination you

are

town, you are henceforth urged to grow a pair.

I have been Town before, you realize? And why should anyone end the day without a majority agreeing for a lynch? Why should my opinion override that of the majority?

If you have a good reason to hammer, then hammer already; you can justify it later. You are human. You are fallible. You are likely to be wrong. That should not stop you in the least.

However, when you try to remove self-accountability, that in and of itself is suspicious.

Why should the person who happens to not be voting someone be more accountable than the 3 people who are calling for a hammer, but happen to be voting that person?

You're ignoring my point and arguing the basis surrounding the point.

I am not saying that I am unaccountable. I am not saying that any of us who called for the hammer are any less accountable than you are. I am saying that your waiting until you had that safety net of 3 other people having as much accountability as you is suspicious.

I don't hammer if a majority don't support it, extenuating circumstances aside. Why should my opinion be more important than the majority's?

Never said that. Said that you shouldn't hold back on acting on your opinion for fear of being shunned by the majority.

[JDodge]

Right. But you are saying that I'm Scum for hammering only with support of 50%+ of the Town. Surely that is the case for any hammer...

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

I would never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town supporting it.

Then again, if by some obscene stretch of the imagination you

are

town, you are henceforth urged to grow a pair.

I have been Town before, you realize? And why should anyone end the day without a majority agreeing for a lynch? Why should my opinion override that of the majority?

If you have a good reason to hammer, then hammer already; you can justify it later. You are human. You are fallible. You are likely to be wrong. That should not stop you in the least.

However, when you try to remove self-accountability, that in and of itself is suspicious.

Why should the person who happens to not be voting someone be more accountable than the 3 people who are calling for a hammer, but happen to be voting that person?

You're ignoring my point and arguing the basis surrounding the point.

I am not saying that I am unaccountable. I am not saying that any of us who called for the hammer are any less accountable than you are. I am saying that your waiting until you had that safety net of 3 other people having as much accountability as you is suspicious.

I don't hammer if a majority don't support it, extenuating circumstances aside. Why should my opinion be more important than the majority's?

I'm seeing a pattern of a question not being answered.

I'm seeing a pattern of me answering Sens's question, him making it come back to same question again, and you hopping in to defend your scumbuddy because mean ol' JD is bullying him again like he always bullies people

[JDodge]

YES BECAUSE I AM NEVER WRONG

Get over your selective perception, Flimsy.

This would appear to be the basis of your mafia play.

My, your little psyche is full of cognitive biases, isn't it?

Ad hominem, I can't tell if that's a step up or a step down from the norm.

It's not slander nor libel if it's true.

[JDodge]

Batt disappeared part way through Guardian's post-mortem, I smell scumlurk. Adel should also come back, but the circumstances (appear) to be different.

Because nobody in this game has a life.

[JDodge]

You're not at all paying attention to what I am saying.

YOU YOURSELF have said, multiple times, that you waited on the hammer until you had (and I paraphrase a bit here) "at least 1 town" calling for it. Hence, you waited for

3 people

to call for the hammer.

This allows you to weasel yourself out of suspicion because

they asked for it

. Sans this confirmation, people would have basis to say "but we were just pressuring him, why the hell did you hammer on page 2", which would thus be bad for you. You saw the opportunity to hammer a townsperson with minimal suspicion being inflicted upon you, and you took it.

I would never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town supporting it.

Then again, if by some obscene stretch of the imagination you

are

town, you are henceforth urged to grow a pair.

I have been Town before, you realize? And why should anyone end the day without a majority agreeing for a lynch? Why should my opinion override that of the majority?

If you have a good reason to hammer, then hammer already; you can justify it later. You are human. You are fallible. You are likely to be wrong. That should not stop you in the least.

However, when you try to remove self-accountability, that in and of itself is suspicious.

Why should the person who happens to not be voting someone be more accountable than the 3 people who are calling for a hammer, but happen to be voting that person?

You're ignoring my point and arguing the basis surrounding the point.

I am not saying that I am unaccountable. I am not saying that any of us who called for the hammer are any less accountable than you are. I am saying that your waiting until you had that safety net of 3 other people having as much accountability as you is suspicious.

I don't hammer if a majority don't support it, extenuating circumstances aside. Why should my opinion be more important than the majority's?

Never said that. Said that you shouldn't hold back on acting on your opinion for fear of being shunned by the majority.

I feel like you're playing word games here. You agree that my opinion shouldn't be worth more than the majority, but I'm scummy for waiting for me to make a majority of people happy with a hammer to hammer?

Read it again. I'm too tired to explain this for the eighth time tonight (IIRC, I lost count at around #5).

[JDodge]

Can you give me any arguments I have refuted, or at least point me to arguments I haven't, in your mind, refuted well enough?

The problem isn't that you're refuting arguments, nor that you're not refuting arguments well enough; the issue is that you're outright

ignoring the point

. The point is that you waited until you could spread out the accountability, and then defined your suspicion after-the-fact; you were attempting to make it look like you were just following the town's will when you were following your own.

I would have had no problem if you had just said "I thought he was scum, hence I hammered." I have a problem when you say "I hammered, I thought he was scum but I wanted to make sure at least town person agreed with me."

See my point there?

[JDodge]

Can you give me any arguments I have refuted, or at least point me to arguments I haven't, in your mind, refuted well enough?

The problem isn't that you're refuting arguments, nor that you're not refuting arguments well enough; the issue is that you're outright

ignoring the point

. The point is that you waited until you could spread out the accountability, and then defined your suspicion after-the-fact; you were attempting to make it look like you were just following the town's will when you were following your own.

I would have had no problem if you had just said "I thought he was scum, hence I hammered." I have a problem when you say "I hammered, I thought he was scum but I wanted to make sure at least town person agreed with me."

See my point there?

Sure. I disagree with the point, but I see it.

I don't know how I can better state that

I will never hammer anyone without 50% of the Town agreeing with the hammer. To do so is, in my opinion, saying my opinion is worth more than that of the majority.

I don't know how I can better state that

in that case, if you by some obscene stretch of the imagination you are town, you are

strongly

advised to grow a pair.

[JDodge]

I don't know how I can better state that I will

never

hammer anyone without 50% of the Town agreeing with the hammer. To do so is, in my opinion, saying my opinion is worth more than that of the majority.

I don't know how I can better state that in that case,

if you by some obscene stretch of the imagination you are town

, you are

strongly

advised to grow a pair.

Emphasises changed.

Are you implying I am never Town?

*headdesk*

In this game.

[JDodge]

Right. But doesn't the fact that I do that regardless of my alignment in general mean that it has nothing to do with my alignment in this game?

Then give examples of this behaviour in the past if you think it will clear you. I am not here to hold your hand and guide you through something that you should know by now.

[JDodge]

Right. But doesn't the fact that I do that regardless of my alignment in general mean that it has nothing to do with my alignment in this game?

Then give examples of this behaviour in the past if you think it will clear you. I am not here to hold your hand and guide you through something that you should know by now.

I am not expecting you to hold my hand, and I don't think the condescending attitude was necessary, either. I am just saying that I don't see why I am being called scummy for not wanting to take advantage of a situation and hammer without a majority.

Your argument is that it is not scummy because you always do it. I ask for examples, and you go off on a tangent attacking the tone of my post instead of (like your buddy Flimsy seems to only be able to contribute by saying) answering the question.

[JDodge]

2 mislynches = 2 town, 2 scum alive = loss.

[JDodge]

So who can you see being scum with Guardian? Sensfan?

I most certainly can't see myself as being Scum with anyone, which is the point I was making.

Note that you didn't answer who you could see being scum with Guardian. How could you hammer in a game where two mislynches=lose for the town without having a good idea about who his scum mate was.

I just don't think you are ignorant enough not to see that placing someone at lynch-1 is a good way to pressure potential scum and his partner into doing something truly scummy.

I would think that looking for scumbuddies is far less important in a game where hitting either Scum wins the game.

Is there anything in particular you expect me to say to the several times you imply I'm not very good at this game?

Uhm.

Generally both people in a scumpair are scum. So, y'know, looking for them will find scum. So, y'know, that's good.

[JDodge]

Sens is the most likely lynch target today, yet you defend him. Why would you defend Sen by attacking JDodge's reasoning? Is it because you are trying to protect your scumbuddy?

This is horrible reasoning. Purely because he is the most likely lynch does not mean he is scum. I'd like to see some arguments from you, rather than sitting back as you are. JDodge's reasoning

always

needs to be attacked because he diverts to semantics and ad hominem if someone doesn't control him. Points for a loaded question, though.

AGAIN:

# of forum games you have played with me in them: 0
# of IRC games: countless

IRC =/= forums.

Thanks for playing, you get a lifetime supply of Rice-a-Roni.

Not to be rude, but I really don't have the time to be doing this for multiple hours, in addition, do you not think that his meta could have changed over a long period of play? I know mine has changed dramatically since October.

See: First quote.

HYPOCRITE

Not to be rude, but I really don't have the time to be doing this for multiple hours, in addition, do you not think that his meta could have changed over a long period of play? I know mine has changed dramatically since October.

That is the point behind sorting his games into town windows and scum windows. That controls for general shifts in playstyle against time.

If you don't have time to spend several hours building player specific metas, I don't think you have a chance of meeting your potential as a forum mafia player. This is a formatt that rewards hard work and diligence.

Finally, someone else who understands the game as a whole.

JDodge: Why would you hammer Guardian on page 2? His MOS, IMO, was just him trying to get out of the random stage by discussing theory and get reactions (unfortunately the reaction was to lynch him). Don't you think it would have been best if he wasn't hammered so as to get as much info towards the next lynch on the off chance that he wasn't scum?

Because I feel Guardian would be a detriment to the town regardless of alignment. Because I thought Guardian was likely scum. Because I thought the info we would get out of it would be amazing (and it is!).

How about now, Batt, you've been posting occasionally, and have not given anything. This new return is not helpful, either. In addition, you're couching questions to JDodge with the answers pre-baked in.

What exactly are you smoking and where can I get some?

[JDodge]

Easy to say, really. I'm not seeing in depth meta analysis from you.

Personal policy - I do not release my meta information on players.

I'm going to ignore the rest of your points as you clearly have:

A. No clue what I'm talking about

B. No clue what you're talking about.

[JDodge]

JDodge: So, according to your first reason in your last post, you thought Guardian was a detriment to the town regardless of alignment. I don't remember there being a policy on lynching people for potentinaly being bad towards town (especially when we are given only 1 mislynch, which makes the second day even harder due to all the townies needing to agree or lose). Also you went after Sens for hammering because you thought he was trying to shed the responsibility of the lynch. If the lynch was so full of win, why would scum want to shed the responsibility off (3 people called for the lynch and if Sen is scum that meant that 2 townies were on the lynch as well, so he could have had their support as well).

Uhm.

Your logic is

insanely

backwards here.

In my opinion

, the lynch was a good lynch. In

popular opinion

, the lynch was bound to be met with attack from most everyone. Why would scum want that responsiblity?

On your other point: It's my new policy. Deal with it.

[JDodge]

Vote: SensFan

I agree with Adel. Imma go through and respond to everything I missed now.

[JDodge]

3.You didn't think he was scum?

I think it is obvious that if Guardian isn't scum

(though I think he is scum)

then batt must be scum. I can't see Adel being scum with anyone else.

Just so everyone knows who I think is scum: Adel/LG

also, why did you clip my answer?

3. No, I didn't have any reason to think he was scum. I was happy with pressure being applied to him because it would help illuminate his alignment

so you paraphrased my reply to make it seem like I was lying, on the very same page I posted it on? What kind of half-assed mafia players are you used to playing with? Do you normally get away with that kind of crap.

Why haven't you complied with LG's request that you post links to all of your games?

~~~
JDodge: has this level of play become standard? I took a couple of months off before this game because outside of the minivitational it seemed like the nominal skill level was approaching functional retardation. Shouldn't I have bothered coming back?

I just barely got back from my own mini-hiatus, and yes, this seems to have become standard. I hate it too.

JDodge: has this level of play become standard? I took a couple of months off before this game because outside of the minivitational it seemed like the nominal skill level was approaching functional retardation. Shouldn't I have bothered coming back?

Sorry to invade on your elitist party, but can I ask that you at least respect the skill that Gurgi, Batt, and I have. I'm sorry that we're apparently not as good as the people you're used to playing with, but I would like to think we're all competent players.

Nice discreditation attempt.

Just checking in. I'm sad to see this game has resorted to a flame-fest.

2 insults and it's a flame-fest? Grow a thicker skin.

Note that whenever asked to back up his claims, Sens goes off on a tangent.

I agree with Adel - if Sens is town, neither of us have any business playing anymore. This game is supposed to be made up of the cream of the crop so to speak, and the one person who I'd consider to be more of a newbie (Batt) is doing eons above what two of the people I'd consider fairly experienced (Flimsy + Sens) are doing, IF by some obscene stretch of the imagination they are town.

[JDodge]

Note that whenever asked to back up his claims, Sens goes off on a tangent.

Really? Because I very clearly gave 2 examples off me "random" voting as Town, and its Adel that has since backed up.

And where the fuck are the examples of "OH I ALWAYS ASK BEFORE I HAMMER A DUR DE HUR DE HUR" that I asked for ages ago?

With all this horrible logic flying around, the blatant backtracking, and the massive amounts of ad hominem that are spewing from JDodge and Adel, this decision has been made easy for me. If you two are allowed to win for simply badmouthing, then I too, give up hope for this game. I am appalled at the play of the so-called "pros". This is sub-par by any standards. This, in addition to their general play, self-absolution, and false arguments, it is clear to me.

You are a complete and utter retard when it comes to mafia. Read some basic texts on logic and fucking reasoning and then get back to me.

[JDodge]

Note that whenever asked to back up his claims, Sens goes off on a tangent.

Really? Because I very clearly gave 2 examples off me "random" voting as Town, and its Adel that has since backed up.

And where the fuck are the examples of "OH I ALWAYS ASK BEFORE I HAMMER A DUR DE HUR DE HUR" that I asked for ages ago?

I could probably dig them up, but unless I'm asked to by Batt, I'm not going to bother.

BEEP BEEP BEEP.

[JDodge]

Note that whenever asked to back up his claims, Sens goes off on a tangent.

Really? Because I very clearly gave 2 examples off me "random" voting as Town, and its Adel that has since backed up.

And where the fuck are the examples of "OH I ALWAYS ASK BEFORE I HAMMER A DUR DE HUR DE HUR" that I asked for ages ago?

With all this horrible logic flying around, the blatant backtracking, and the massive amounts of ad hominem that are spewing from JDodge and Adel, this decision has been made easy for me. If you two are allowed to win for simply badmouthing, then I too, give up hope for this game. I am appalled at the play of the so-called "pros". This is sub-par by any standards. This, in addition to their general play, self-absolution, and false arguments, it is clear to me.

You are a complete and utter retard when it comes to mafia. Read some basic texts on logic and fucking reasoning and then get back to me.

Explain to me, how anything that you just said is not ad hominem.

I can spout buzzwords too.

CHANGE

YES WE CAN

BEEP BEEP BEEP

I'M A LITTLE FREAKING TEAPOT SHORT AND STOUT, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT

Read. Now.

[JDodge]

Note that whenever asked to back up his claims, Sens goes off on a tangent.

Really? Because I very clearly gave 2 examples off me "random" voting as Town, and its Adel that has since backed up.

And where the fuck are the examples of "OH I ALWAYS ASK BEFORE I HAMMER A DUR DE HUR DE HUR" that I asked for ages ago?

I could probably dig them up, but unless I'm asked to by Batt, I'm not going to bother.

BEEP BEEP BEEP.

Not at all. If Batt is Scum, I lose, and won't waste my time digging up quotes that Adel has read 4-5 times and chose not to mention. If he is Town, he can ask me anything, and I will oblidge.

BEEEP BEEEP BEEEP

[JDodge]

Hey there Sens! Explain how what you're doing now is any different from what Adel did then.

You know why you won't give examples? Because they don't exist. Because you made a brash claim and you're either too fucking hard-headed to admit that you were wrong or trying to hide the fact that you were wrong because you're either scum or too much of a goddamn pussy to actually say so.

Which is it?

[JDodge]

I made a statement. You respond by insulting my intelligence and calling me a retard. That ignores my statement, and is toward my personality and characteristics.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.

Read the actual response instead of the vitriol that it is buried in and you'll see I've answered every question that's been asked of me. You refuse to read them because you're so UPSET that someone would DARE to insult YOU of all people.

[JDodge]

I made a statement. You respond by insulting my intelligence and calling me a retard. That ignores my statement, and is toward my personality and characteristics.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.

Read the actual response instead of the vitriol that it is buried in and you'll see I've answered every question that's been asked of me. You refuse to read them because you're so UPSET that someone would DARE to insult YOU of all people.

You did not explain in the least how what you said was not ad hominem, you said I was merely spouting buzzwords instead, explain, please.

I gave you clear reasons as to why it was not ad hominem, in that it was an argument inlaid into a bed of insults. Learn what ad hominem means, THEN get back to me.

[JDodge]

Hey there Sens! Explain how what you're doing now is any different from what Adel did then.

You know why you won't give examples? Because they don't exist. Because you made a brash claim and you're either too fucking hard-headed to admit that you were wrong or trying to hide the fact that you were wrong because you're either scum or too much of a goddamn pussy to actually say so.

Which is it?

Adel claimed I never random vote as Town, despite having supposedly read the early parts of all my games, in which I have random voted SEVERAL times. She votes me for this. I call her on it, she immediately claims the meta read was weak and gives OTHER reasons for voting me. Then Gurgi asks her about her INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO META, and she then claims she doesn't actually meta that way.

Then there's me who said I do not hammer if there is not majority support. I linked every single goddamn game I have played in, classified by type and alignment. If you want to go and find the examples that are out there where I ask for a concensus or that I do not hammer until everyone on the wagon has chimed it, go ahead. I'm not going to waste my time combing through my games when it won't sway you or Adel anyways, and I don't know if Batt will bother doing anything beside laugh that there are 2 people in hammering-range and he is Scum. If he asks me, I will gladly go out and find the examples that are out there. In the mean time, feel free.

Give exact examples, NOW.

and I don't know if Batt will bother

doing anything beside laugh that there are 2 people in hammering-range and he is Scum.

ITP Sens pretty clearly states that he thinks - no, KNOWS - Batt is scum, and that Adel is town (logical basis based on the context of the post).

Flimsy, pull your head out of your goddamn ass and see the light already.

[JDodge]

Hey there Sens! Explain how what you're doing now is any different from what Adel did then.

So, now you have absolutely no reason not to be voting Adel. Except, if you prefer lynching someone who hammered the same wagon you said you would, over someone who attempted to absolve them self of all connection to it.

You're mentally incompetent. I'm convinced of it now.

[JDodge]

and

I don't know

if Batt will bother

doing anything beside laugh that there are 2 people in hammering-range

and he is Scum.

ITP Sens pretty clearly states that he thinks - no, KNOWS - Batt is scum, and that Adel is town (logical basis based on the context of the post).

Flimsy, pull your head out of your goddamn ass and see the light already.

Extra emphasis added.

And will me giving you examples cause you do rethink your vote?

Maybe. Why is this relevant?

[JDodge]

and

I don't know

if Batt will bother

doing anything beside laugh that there are 2 people in hammering-range

and he is Scum.

ITP Sens pretty clearly states that he thinks - no, KNOWS - Batt is scum, and that Adel is town (logical basis based on the context of the post).

Flimsy, pull your head out of your goddamn ass and see the light already.

Extra emphasis added.

And will me giving you examples cause you do rethink your vote?

Maybe. Why is this relevant?

"I don't know if X and Y and Z" does NOT mean "I don't know X, but know Y and Z".

Because I will not spend time looking for examples if it will serve literally no purpose. I want confirmation that you will unvote if I can find you examples.

I will not give you that confirmation. You will do what I say and I will reconsider my stance.

[JDodge]

Yes, my supreme Master!

That's more like it.

[JDodge]

I want one as scum too, to prove the "regardless of alignment" bit of your claim.

[JDodge]

Batt, Sens and I are on Adel. Adel and JDodge are on Sens. DON'T HAMMER ANYONE YET. THINK IT THROUGH PLEASE.

Hammer Sens. The fact that he isn't dead yet disgusts me.

[JDodge]

I want one as scum too, to prove the "regardless of alignment" bit of your claim.

Sure, I'll try. I hope you realize, though, that you basically just said "Alright, so go and explain to me why this is not a town tell for you."

I don't care whether you want it to be a town-tell for you or not. I want to see whether you were lying through your teeth.

[JDodge]

"Yeah, I am willing to drop the hammer on K7. Anyone have anything else they want to say today?"

Mafia 79 - Amish Mafia.

Good enough?

Asking if there is any more discussion wanted prior to a hammer =/= "waiting to make sure people want you to hammer". Try again.

[JDodge]

Really? Doesn't my question leave plenty of room for anyone who does NOT support the hammer to say so, and unvote?

No, not really. I am looking for

exact examples of the behaviour you've professed to "always do"

. "Good enough" doesn't cut it.

[JDodge]

sensfan -- it wud have been nice to say you were suspicious of me, and why, and let me respond to it -- before hammering.

not doing so is uberscumzie

Fair enough, though I think everyone on the wagon is just as accountable for the fact you were lynched as I was, since they were all calling for a lynch.

Hello tomorrow's lynch.

Had I been voting him and not you, would you have hammered?

Yes, because I'd have thought it a well-reasoned hammer instead of pandering to the masses.

It's Sens-Flimsy. Calling this now.

WOOP WOOP

[JDodge]

I call this as Battousai-Guardian. Y'all can go home now.

Huh?

In case you missed it:

Not still living - 1/6

Guardian (

Townie

)-Lynched day 1

At least I have the balls to admit when I was wrong.

[JDodge]

Batt, the only advice I have for you is this:

Do

not

, in

any way

, treat this as Adel v. Sens. Treat it as Adel + JD v. Sens + Flimsy, because that's what it comes down to. Just take your time, read between the lines, and the truth should become apparent to you.

Sens, you made a fatal error in judgment. You underestimated the ferocity with which the people "calling for the hammer" would come down on you with.

Flimsy, learn how to play as scum sometime. Every time I'm town and you're scum in a lylo situation, IRC or here, you do the same exact thing - bombard with incorrect statements which make you

look

correct through sheer bulk. Your attempts to discredit me were pathetic and weak.

Guardian, sorry for lynching you on page 2. It cracked the game wide open for us, so you should at least be happy that you got to witness the magic.

Adel, you were a pleasure to play with, sorry this game couldn't have been longer than roughly 3-4 days. You have, by far, one of the best grasps of the game as a whole out of anyone I have ever seen. Please, don't follow through with your "I have no business playing anymore" comment. The site needs more people like you.

[JDodge]

WOOP WOOP

[JDodge]

I stand by my grow a thicker skin comment.

[JDodge]

It's rather unforgiving to the scum, one mistake is game over, but the town can screw up once without penalty.

That compensates for the natural advantage the scum gain from nightlessness,

especially

when they can coordinate unlimitedly during the day.

[JDodge]

I'd be up for it.

[JDodge]

Well I put the game on the Open Queue list. I think Sens maybe right about this. I have Jdodge, Lord Gurgi and SensFan confirmed to play again. Right now I don't have this as a sign up just a note for myself on the queue starting page.

If someone is not interested, I vote Shanba/Yos/Thesp/Glork to replace

I could probably get Shanba in on it. Just give me a couple of days. I'll get a hold of Guardian, too.

[JDodge]

Shanba said no, so I'm going to back out as well.