Newbie 688 - Game Over, Mafia Wins!

[Moses le fou]

Then you're an idiot. Simple as. You have given 2 reasons for wanting to vote Panamon. 1 of those is in fact NOT a scumtell, and other is something you have committed yourself, and thus, cannot vote for without expecting some serious attention.

Wow, ad hominem. Way to class up the game.

Oh, and for what it's worth, when I voted for Panamon, I was the first of three votes on mastin (Panamon being the third). If I wanted a wagon for the sake of a wagon, wouldn't I have left my vote on him?

This is a null tell at worst. Personally, id even see it as a towntell, given that i cant see Mafia wanting to 'break the rules' in order to hunt scum.

Are you even reading my posts? Panamon tore into Schez with underhanded play. From there, he just tossed himself over to mastin because it was a more promising wagon.

Aww, didums! /sarcasm

I point out the biggest reason why Panamon's vote was so suspicious and that's all you can give me?

Ftr, as far as im aware, mod action was taken AGAINST Schez, as opposed to Panamon. Granted it was a result of Panamon's suspicion, but i dislike the way you are trying to:

A. Portray Panamon as a rulebreaker.
B. Portray rulebreaking as scummy.

Rulebreaking is scummy. It adds unnecessary chaos to the game. With people clamoring over whether the action was in fact against the rules and mods intervening, it's a way for scum to stir up shit under some semblance of a cover while making others look suspicious (i.e. Schez).

Look at what he did. He put a vote on Schez and put Schez in a position where he could only defend himself by pulling info from another game. Schez has two options: poorly defend himself (which will make him look scummy) or defend himself by breaking the rules (which brings down the wrath of the mod and, as we found out, makes him look scummy). In and of itself, I did not find it incredibly scummy (which is why I did not vote for Panamon while that was going on). However, in addition to his vote on mastin (and the means in which he made it), it reads as scum. Specifically, it reads as scum trying to obfuscate with drama and, when it fails, jumps on a bandwagon.

ROFL!
Sorry, but this is the funniest thing i've seen all day.

By 'multiple' i take it you mean 'two'?

I've welcomed the opportunity to address your concerns. You've put forward 2, and ive pointed out the inherent flaws in both.

You dont have a leg to stand on.

If you lump the multiple reasons why I find Panamon's mastin vote suspicious into one, then yeah, it does equal two. Never mind that two is more than one, making it multiple. Never mind you have yet to address the flippancy and lack of content behind Panamon's vote. Even if you think my analysis is wrong-headed, don't pretend that I haven't given any.

famous last words?

Laughing to the gallows? How brave of you.

=======================================

Page 12 Votecount

WeatheredClown: (0/5)
Crysnia: (1/5) springlullaby,
mrfixij: (0/5)
Mastin: (1/5) WeatheredClown
Moses le fou: (2/5) Battle Mage, orangepenguin,
Scheherazade: (0/5)
Battle Mage: (2/5) Scheherazade, Moses le fou,
springlullaby: (0/5)
orangepenguin: (1/5) Crysnia,

Not Voting: (2/9) Mastin, mrfixij,

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch!
=======================================

[Battle Mage]

Judging by the other games I've played with orange, he's fitting his meta perfectly right now. 1-2 pages of posts for 10+ pages of discussion, generally 1 liners and minor contributions unless the discussion shifts directly to him. He basically plays every game like a cop.

Anyways, I'm sure you're all surprised but I'm generally out of material for now. I will come back tonight after I'm done fencing and review the thread in its entirety, update my notes, and see what I can pick up.

266 would be a good place to start.

BM

[Battle Mage]

Then you're an idiot. Simple as. You have given 2 reasons for wanting to vote Panamon. 1 of those is in fact NOT a scumtell, and other is something you have committed yourself, and thus, cannot vote for without expecting some serious attention.

Wow, ad hominem. Way to class up the game.

Oh, and for what it's worth, when I voted for Panamon, I was the first of three votes on mastin (Panamon being the third). If I wanted a wagon for the sake of a wagon, wouldn't I have left my vote on him?

Scum tend to follow momentum. If you thought Panamon was a more promising wagon, i see no reason why you wouldnt switch to him.

This is a null tell at worst. Personally, id even see it as a towntell, given that i cant see Mafia wanting to 'break the rules' in order to hunt scum.

Are you even reading my posts? Panamon tore into Schez with underhanded play. From there, he just tossed himself over to mastin because it was a more promising wagon.

META IS NOT UNDERHANDED PLAY. Jesus christ...
This is a newbie game. If you dont listen when the IC's tell you things, there isn't much point us being here.

Aww, didums! /sarcasm

I point out the biggest reason why Panamon's vote was so suspicious and that's all you can give me?

"he made the move rather flippantly" is the biggest reason you have for suspecting Panamon? Wow. Yeh, there's not much else i can say to that.

Ftr, as far as im aware, mod action was taken AGAINST Schez, as opposed to Panamon. Granted it was a result of Panamon's suspicion, but i dislike the way you are trying to:

A. Portray Panamon as a rulebreaker.
B. Portray rulebreaking as scummy.

Rulebreaking is scummy. It adds unnecessary chaos to the game. With people clamoring over whether the action was in fact against the rules and mods intervening, it's a way for scum to stir up shit under some semblance of a cover while making others look suspicious (i.e. Schez).

Incorrect. Rulebreaking is not scummy. You can take this to just about any experienced player on site, and they will tell you the same thing. Rulebreaking is not inherently scummy, because in this case, you are accusing Panamon of breaking the rules IN ORDER TO SCUMHUNT MORE EFFECTIVELY.

Look at what he did. He put a vote on Schez and put Schez in a position where he could only defend himself by pulling info from another game. Schez has two options: poorly defend himself (which will make him look scummy) or defend himself by breaking the rules (which brings down the wrath of the mod and, as we found out, makes him look scummy). In and of itself, I did not find it incredibly scummy (which is why I did not vote for Panamon while that was going on).

He used meta to the best of his ability, in order to become certain of his vote. The meta he offered was not 1 that could have been used, or even vouched for, by anyone else, therefore Schez had no reason to worry. Was the reason Panamon conclusive of Schez being scum? Or was it just a suspicion? I can see why Schez might have found it awkward. But as it is done all the time as town, it is not a scumtell to use meta from an ongoing game in consideration for a vote.

ROFL!
Sorry, but this is the funniest thing i've seen all day.

By 'multiple' i take it you mean 'two'?

I've welcomed the opportunity to address your concerns. You've put forward 2, and ive pointed out the inherent flaws in both.

You dont have a leg to stand on.

*fluff*

yeah, it does equal two.

Never mind you have yet to address the flippancy and lack of content behind Panamon's vote. Even if you think my analysis is wrong-headed, don't pretend that I haven't given any.

I've already addressed that. Firstly, if his reasoning was weak, it's because it was an early stage in the game. He was unable to pursue a Schez wagon, so he moved onto his next suspect. Gut feeling was acceptable at that point. Furthermore, as you made a vote on the same level of reasoning, you cannot consider this a valid argument.

BM

[mrfixij]

Upon review of the earlier third of the thread, I definitely don't like OrangePenguin. I also want input from Mastin, if he should ever decide to return (

That could be read as requesting a prod of mastin

). I think it was obvious that Mastin was scummy as all hell early game. Orange says not only that it's in scum's best interests to keep bad players alive till late game (read: mastin), but then goes on to defend mastin to prevent his lynch, in an obvious attempt to keep him around TO LATE GAME. He also stated in his next post that there are better candidates for scum, but fails to list them, or to even cast a vote at that time to indicate WHO those better candidates are.

The previously mentioned exchange can be found on page 3.

I'm not leaving Crys off the hook, nor BM, but after re-reading the thread, this snip-it caught my eye and I want it addressed.

My vote stands on Crysania for continuity's sake, but I'd like some more contribution and a solid explanation from Orange. I will switch my vote if he can't deliver.

[mrfixij]

EBWOP: Oh, I guess my vote wasn't anywhere. In which case,

Vote: Orangepenguin

[vollkan]

Prodding Mastin now

[Mastin]

Put simply:

D'oh.

I have a strong dislike for my internet service. Around winter, it has a bad tendency to break down without warning. It should be fixed and I am back. I have not been doing nothing, though, and have formed opinions on who's scum and who's not, but at this point, my opinions would mean nothing without me giving proof, something which I am struggling to do. First time's the hardest. :/

[orangepenguin]

Upon review of the earlier third of the thread, I definitely don't like OrangePenguin. I also want input from Mastin, if he should ever decide to return (

That could be read as requesting a prod of mastin

). I think it was obvious that Mastin was scummy as all hell early game. Orange says not only that it's in scum's best interests to keep bad players alive till late game (read: mastin), but then goes on to defend mastin to prevent his lynch, in an obvious attempt to keep him around TO LATE GAME. He also stated in his next post that there are better candidates for scum, but fails to list them, or to even cast a vote at that time to indicate WHO those better candidates are.

The previously mentioned exchange can be found on page 3.

I'm not leaving Crys off the hook, nor BM, but after re-reading the thread, this snip-it caught my eye and I want it addressed.

My vote stands on Crysania for continuity's sake, but I'd like some more contribution and a solid explanation from Orange. I will switch my vote if he can't deliver.

I still think Mastin is newbtown. I am not going to vote him just cause he's a bad player. I hardly alone prevented his lynch. I just don't think he was the best choice for lynch. He had poor logic and a poor strategy, and had he been in an open game instead, it would've been scummy, but considering this is his first game..

I feel my vote on Moses is justified at this point. I haven't really voted at all this game, so it's merely a pressure vote at this point on a person I feel is scummy. Interesting results.

[WeatheredClown]

...
Look at what he did. He put a vote on Schez and put Schez in a position where he could only defend himself by pulling info from another game. Schez has two options: poorly defend himself (which will make him look scummy) or defend himself by breaking the rules (which brings down the wrath of the mod and, as we found out, makes him look scummy). In and of itself, I did not find it incredibly scummy (which is why I did not vote for Panamon while that was going on).

Isn't the other option here to claim that responding to that would be discussing a different running game, and so it should be removed from the table?

[Moses le fou]

...
Look at what he did. He put a vote on Schez and put Schez in a position where he could only defend himself by pulling info from another game. Schez has two options: poorly defend himself (which will make him look scummy) or defend himself by breaking the rules (which brings down the wrath of the mod and, as we found out, makes him look scummy). In and of itself, I did not find it incredibly scummy (which is why I did not vote for Panamon while that was going on).

Isn't the other option here to claim that responding to that would be discussing a different running game, and so it should be removed from the table?

That's what I mean by "poorly defend himself." If Schez did so, Panamon could have easily accused Schez of dodging the issue. It would have been the right thing to do, but Panamon would still have the advantage. And that's what I mean by Panamon pushing Schez to break the rules being scummy. Schez had to do so in order to get him off his back. Otherwise, it gave Panamon an easy wagon to lead and I think that if Panamon hadn't backed off when Volkan intervened, Schez would be lynched right now.

By the way, for the record, I'm not saying that meta in general is underhanded. However, placing somebody in a place where one cannot defend oneself without breaking the rules is scummy.

Quick aside: Why isn't springlullaby backing me up on this? Didn't SL push on Schez basically because he has observed that he's only been tempted to break the rules when he's scum? Wasn't that the crux of SL's push against Schez?


On another note, I'm really bothered that HIGH AND MIGHTY IC BATTLE MAGE completely dismisses the flippancy of Panamon's vote on Mastin. Non-commital play=scummy play, am I right? Gut feeling is not acceptable when it puts the player at L-2 (see post 110 to see that I'm not the only person aware of the danger putting somebody at L-2 possesses). And even if you think my argument is incorrect, I would like to think that I've proven that I'm not going on a fucking gut feeling here.

And really, it's like this: Battle Mage has taken over Panamon's role. He knows whether Panamon was scum or town. He also knows that Panamon was at L-2 when he came on. I think a good town player would have addressed the reasons Panamon acquired those votes rather than dismissing them. BM would've come on and went "well, I see why you guys voted for him. He was, after all, a newb. However, I can assure you I'm town and I offer up Player X as a must more suitable lynch target." But no, BM would much rather discredit me, if not lynch me. Not only does he reek of OMGUS, but he has yet to acknowledge the CONTEXT in which any of the incidents in question have occured. Panamon made an L-2 vote, I made an L-2 vote for an entirely different reason, therefore we're the same. Panamon uses an underhanded meta, BM insists that meta in general isn't underhanded. BM would rather argue mafia theory than address the specific incidents.

Let's lynch the bastard already.

[springlullaby]

Why should I back you up?

It has always been my view that Panamon didn't break the rule at all. Schez did. It was entirely up to Schez to say 'sorry that goes into no-no territory', and that would have been the end of it.

I agree with BM on this point.

--------------------------------------

Other dudes voting people, what do you think of BM?

[Moses le fou]

Why should I back you up?

It has always been my view that Panamon didn't break the rule at all. Schez did. It was entirely up to Schez to say 'sorry that goes into no-no territory', and that would have been the end of it.

I agree with BM on this point.

--------------------------------------

Other dudes voting people, what do you think of BM?

I'm referring to BM's point that rulebreaking in general isn't scummy. If I recall correctly, you found Schez's rulebreaking scummy in and of itself.

[mrfixij]

BM bothers me. I've been getting the vibe that he's trying to get friendly with everyone, which I understand is his personality, but it seems more conducive to keeping himself alive than lynching scum. As of now though, that's entirely a gut read and not something I'm willing to lynch for.

[Scheherazade]

I disagree with Battle Mage enough in his defence of Panamon and his tone to keep my vote where it is: I don't think he's really strengthened or weakened my suspicion. He acknowledged the one point I mentioned against Panamon as a potentially valid scum-tell. He certainly gets points for honesty, but I never had issues with Panamon's honesty.

However, I think he's insightful and, as mentioned, honest, so I'd be willing to look elsewhere for today's lynch, simply because his value as a townie is higher than average. He could be scum manipulating me, but lynching him if he fails to deliver seems like an entirely reasonable option at this point.

Because of my willingness to look elsewhere, I've been watching Battle Mage's interactions with Moses le fou and mrfixij.

Obviously, I agree with Moses le fou that Panamon is scummy, however he may over state the case we have against him/Battle Mage. I don't think that anything he's said so far is scummy or incomprehensible. It would be scummy, perhaps, if Battle Mage winds up confirmed town.

Not much happened after Battle Mage FoS'ed mrfixij, so my tickle of suspicion there hasn't changed much in either direction.

Right now, the best direction seems to be getting Battle Mage to formally present a case against Moses le fou to justify his vote and going from there. Again, I don't see anything much against Moses so far, so before I consider voting for him, it would help if someone explained Battle Mage's vote better to me.

[Mastin]

Oh, *Censor*. Bad luck has stricken me again. I have no choice but to

request replacement.

...No, I'm not running. I'm not feeling hopeless. I'm not cornered, or anything like that. I'm not feeling any of the emotions Panamon has been accused of feeling. I really don't want to do this, but have no choice. The one, and ONLY computer which I can regularly access this forum from just broke this morning. I'm lucky that I can even get on this one. While it could be repaired and/or I could find another computer to regularly use to come here, the fact remains that this, currently, is not the case. So I wouldn't be able to do anything. At that point, I believe that I should be replaced.

...you're probably better off without me, anyway, since I suck. I really messed up, so I hope my replacement can forgive me for the trouble I've caused. I'd love to keep on playing, but...well, I can't play with no computer. Sorry for failing you all.

-Mastin

[vollkan]

I am now looking for a replacement

[Battle Mage]

Oh, *Censor*. Bad luck has stricken me again. I have no choice but to

request replacement.

...No, I'm not running. I'm not feeling hopeless. I'm not cornered, or anything like that. I'm not feeling any of the emotions Panamon has been accused of feeling. I really don't want to do this, but have no choice. The one, and ONLY computer which I can regularly access this forum from just broke this morning. I'm lucky that I can even get on this one. While it could be repaired and/or I could find another computer to regularly use to come here, the fact remains that this, currently, is not the case. So I wouldn't be able to do anything. At that point, I believe that I should be replaced.

...you're probably better off without me, anyway, since I suck. I really messed up, so I hope my replacement can forgive me for the trouble I've caused. I'd love to keep on playing, but...well, I can't play with no computer. Sorry for failing you all.

-Mastin

Defensive much?? 0.o

FoS: Mastin

BM

[Battle Mage]

BM bothers me. I've been getting the vibe that he's trying to get friendly with everyone, which I understand is his personality, but it seems more conducive to keeping himself alive than lynching scum. As of now though, that's entirely a gut read and not something I'm willing to lynch for.

Lol, ftr, it's not my personality atall. Although i will always tackle attacks against me before i make attacks of my own, my priority as town is with hunting scumbags. That does not mean i'll roll over and allow myself to be lynched.

BM

[Battle Mage]

...
Look at what he did. He put a vote on Schez and put Schez in a position where he could only defend himself by pulling info from another game. Schez has two options: poorly defend himself (which will make him look scummy) or defend himself by breaking the rules (which brings down the wrath of the mod and, as we found out, makes him look scummy). In and of itself, I did not find it incredibly scummy (which is why I did not vote for Panamon while that was going on).

Isn't the other option here to claim that responding to that would be discussing a different running game, and so it should be removed from the table?

That's what I mean by "poorly defend himself." If Schez did so, Panamon could have easily accused Schez of dodging the issue. It would have been the right thing to do, but Panamon would still have the advantage. And that's what I mean by Panamon pushing Schez to break the rules being scummy. Schez had to do so in order to get him off his back. Otherwise, it gave Panamon an easy wagon to lead and I think that if Panamon hadn't backed off when Volkan intervened, Schez would be lynched right now.

Lol. As we've already established, this wouldn't be the case, because nobody in their right mind votes based on a meta of an unconfirmed player. Unless it was 1 to lynch, Panamon had no chance of getting Schez lynched solely for that.

Quick aside: Why isn't springlullaby backing me up on this? Didn't SL push on Schez basically because he has observed that he's only been tempted to break the rules when he's scum? Wasn't that the crux of SL's push against Schez?

Lol, do you really have to plead for SL to come and bail you out here?

Non-commital play=scummy play, am I right?

Because Panamon was so Non-commital? A vote based on a meta, and a vote which you say is based on 'gut feeling', and he's NON COMMITAL?!
Sounds like the exact opposite to me.

Gut feeling is not acceptable when it puts the player at L-2

Maybe you should take this into account, as you are equally guilty of this.

(see post 110 to see that I'm not the only person aware of the danger putting somebody at L-2 possesses).

Why do you keep appealing to other players?

Confirm Vote: Moses

And even if you think my argument is incorrect, I would like to think that I've proven that I'm not going on a fucking gut feeling here.

It's worse than that. You clearly dont even believe your own arguments. If you did, you wouldn't have to keep begging for support.

And really, it's like this: Battle Mage has taken over Panamon's role. He knows whether Panamon was scum or town. He also knows that Panamon was at L-2 when he came on. I think a good town player would have addressed the reasons Panamon acquired those votes rather than dismissing them.

I have addressed them.
Both reasons you have presented are bs. Do you genuinely think it is more protown for somebody to come in and beg the town for forgiveness for past sins, than to actually comment honestly and objectively on the reasons being given?

But no, BM would much rather discredit me, if not lynch me. Not only does he reek of OMGUS, but he has yet to acknowledge the CONTEXT in which any of the incidents in question have occured.

The former isn't especially difficult. You are the one who is stinking of OMGUS, given that you just acknowledged if i hadnt attacked you, you'd have considered me protown.

Panamon made an L-2 vote, I made an L-2 vote for an entirely different reason, therefore we're the same.

No. Your point was that Panamon gave a poorly backed up L-2 vote. My retort was that you have done exactly the same.

Panamon uses an underhanded meta, BM insists that meta in general isn't underhanded. BM would rather argue mafia theory than address the specific incidents.

This is a newbie game. It's hardly my fault that you can't handle the basic principles of the game!
You can't expect to claim something is scummy, when it isnt, and then try and lynch based on that, without getting some heat.

Let's lynch the bastard already.

Ad hominem? Way to class up the game.

Needless to say, i'm happy with my vote.

BM

[Battle Mage]

I disagree with Battle Mage enough in his defence of Panamon

and his tone to keep my vote where it is: I don't think he's really strengthened or weakened my suspicion.

He acknowledged the one point I mentioned against Panamon as a potentially valid scum-tell

. He certainly gets points for honesty, but I never had issues with Panamon's honesty.

This paragraph bugs me. First you claim that

RED

and then claim that

GREEN

.
If i acknowleged the one point you made against Panamon, how are you disagreeing with my defence of him? How can you consider me defending him atall?

Right now, the best direction seems to be getting Battle Mage to formally present a case against Moses le fou to justify his vote and going from there. Again, I don't see anything much against Moses so far, so before I consider voting for him, it would help if someone explained Battle Mage's vote better to me.

So you've kept your vote on me, but you are interested to follow my suspicions? Wtf??

The case on Moses is pretty self explanatory. He is flailing openly, is trying to push a case he neither believes in, nor has any merit, and he won't admit he is wrong. Hence, he is scum.

BM

[Crysnia]

I notice a lot of talk of strategy and people being "experts" on this game. I was under the assumption that this was a beginner game. Everyone who keeps assuming that they are more knowledgable about Mafia than the rest of us should 1)Stop beating up on the newbies who may not know much about the game and this is their first go 2)If you are really that advanced, then what the hell are you doing in the newbie game.

/rant

[vollkan]

Thanks very much to Alduskkel, who henceforth replaces Mastin

[Scheherazade]

@Battle Mage

I disagree with Battle Mage enough in his defence of Panamon

and his tone to keep my vote where it is: I don't think he's really strengthened or weakened my suspicion.

He acknowledged the one point I mentioned against Panamon as a potentially valid scum-tell

. He certainly gets points for honesty, but I never had issues with Panamon's honesty.

This paragraph bugs me. First you claim that

RED

and then claim that

GREEN

.
If i acknowleged the one point you made against Panamon, how are you disagreeing with my defence of him? How can you consider me defending him atall?

Right now, the best direction seems to be getting Battle Mage to formally present a case against Moses le fou to justify his vote and going from there. Again, I don't see anything much against Moses so far, so before I consider voting for him, it would help if someone explained Battle Mage's vote better to me.

So you've kept your vote on me, but you are interested to follow my suspicions? Wtf??

The case on Moses is pretty self explanatory. He is flailing openly, is trying to push a case he neither believes in, nor has any merit, and he won't admit he is wrong. Hence, he is scum.

BM

Perhaps I was unclear. That you agreed I was responding to a potentially valid scum-tell is honest, but it's not part of a defence of him. You just said something like "I'd agree with you if I didn't know Panamon's alignment." If you consider that a good defence, then I disagree with you. If that was a non-defence, then I'd only move my vote from you to lynch somebody scummier.

Which leads to the second point. I'm not less suspicious of you and you're not near lynching, so I'm not inclined to move my vote. Of course it's possible that I'm wrong and of course there's another mafia player out there so I'm going to see if you dig anything up. If either you or your suspects flip, it might tell me something about the other's alignment. I don't see what's so illogical about keeping my vote on you while expressing interest in your scum-hunt. It seems wisest to me.

[Alduskkel]

Hello everyone, there's a lot to read so please give me some time to catch up.

[Alduskkel]

Oh yeah, and

unvote

if it's needed.