Mini 873 Plainview Game Over


Locked
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #13 (isolation #0) » Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:30 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Gammagooey wrote:Hey guys, first game I've played on here, so I'll start this off with a
Vote:AlmasterGM
for having a Pikachu avatar when Jigglypuff is clearly superior.
Ok, seriously - how did you know I had a Pikachu avatar when I haven't made any posts in the thread yet? The fact that you posses this information means you went and looked at past games of the other players in this game, which is an extremely stretchy move as town when you're only on page one. NOBODY does that. I think it's more likely that you're scum scoping out your victims so you know how to avoid their scumhunting techniques.

Serious
Vote: Gammagooey
Who said the RVS wasn't useful?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #19 (isolation #1) » Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:23 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:oh, and i found the scum buddy as well.

HOS Gamma Gooey
for that idiotic comment about Jigglypuff being superior.

There, game over we win. Now let's bandwagon and lynch these scumbags.
God, you're annoying. I hope you get killed quickly.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #21 (isolation #2) » Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:27 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:
AlmasterGM wrote: God, you're annoying. I hope you get killed quickly.
wow, two posts in, and you're ready to kill me?

i didn't know that this was also the random temper tantrum stage
If you can be this obnoxious three posts in, I can only imagine how bad the future possibilities are.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #30 (isolation #3) » Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:25 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

SpyreX wrote:You missed something important. It wasn't die. It was killed.
Now, semantics blah blah but - why would one assume killed over lynched?
There's one reason that sure springs to mind. Guess what it is?

Unvote, Vote: AlmasterGM
"Killed" is all-inclusive - it could be night-killed, day-killed, mod-killed, or lynched (which is a form of killing). I don't discriminate. It's ironic that you say "semantics blah blah" and then proceed to MAKE a semantics argument - bit of a contradiction, no?
MordyS wrote:Researching fellow players before you start playing is absolutely not scummy. Making a serious vote based on it is bizarre, and sounds like railroading the newbie. Also, I find early bandwagons help clarify people's positions, so this couples a good reason (your quote above), with a good strategy (clarifying positions thru bandwagoning). As such:

Vote: AlmasterGM
It absolutely is scummy - Town don't read up on all the other players in the game
before the game has even started.
That is a scum move. What is absolutely more scummy, though, is this "bandwagons early good" argument you are presenting. It has the opposite effect of what you say it does - rather than clarify where people stand, it lets everyone hide in the mob and brings us dangerously close to an early lynch based on practically nothing. Terrible plan.
Muffin wrote:I'm inclined to agree with Spyrex and Mordy, actually.
Welcome to the bandwagon. Have a nice time buddying.
Gammagooey wrote:Hey Almaster, you know how in just about every forum people bitch at you if you don't lurk before posting? I read through some games before signing up for my first one, and saw you in one of them.

A question though for you: I can understand being hostile at me because you think I'm scummy, but what's with your comment on archae? He seems to be agreeing with you, and you single him out and hope he dies first. What exactly is that about?
Yeah whatever, your excuse is noted. There's bigger fish to fry at this point anyway, like Mordy. As far as archae goes, I don't care whether he agrees with me or not - people agreeing with me doesn't make me like them. Moreover, as you should know if you've read some of my past games, I judge quickly and with extreme prejudice.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #35 (isolation #4) » Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:49 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:EBWOP: "Almaster", sorry
You are SO lucky you corrected that. Past game history is in my wiki.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #145 (isolation #5) » Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:03 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Seriously guys, it was Halloween yesterday. I had other things to do. This thread has turned into giant walls of text - I'll catch up in a bit.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #221 (isolation #6) » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:37 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Hi everyone,

First, I'm dropping the Gammagooey argument. I reserve the right to say "I told you so" at the endgame if Gamma is scum because I'd never do that, but since the general consensus is that it's not a scumtell and others have done it before, I'll let it go.

Now, to answer a couple of questions that were posed to me.
Lots of people wrote:Where the hell have you been?
Busy. Now I'm back and ready to roll.
Gammagooey wrote:Almaster the game I read with you in it was Stratego mafia, and you definitely weren't this aggressive in there, is there a different game in particular I should be reading to see this prejudice you speak of?
I was a cop in that game, so I had to play conservatively. Read some of my vanilla town games. Honestly, though, there is really nothing to be gained from this - if I was scum, I wouldn't be playing to my scum meta.

====

My current top three suspects are MordyS and archaebob. I'm currently going to
Unvote: Vote: archaebob
, with MordyS as a secondary suspect. There are 9 justifications for the archaeboe vote:

1) It hasn't even been one day yet and he's already indicting people for not posting. Forced pro-town.
archaebob" wrote:Foilist 13 and cruelty haven't posted yet. It's still early, but I just wanted to put that out there, as a running list. "
It hasn't even been one day yet and he's already indicting people for not posting. Forced pro-town.
2) Goes from apparent uncertainty / question asking to a vote without anything significant happening between the two posts. No substantial explanation, either.
AGM - why would you assume that any town player would do what YOU would do? Especially considering that this is his first game, I find it difficult to follow your suspicion of him.
Almaster has played in several games. Not sure how he could actually think this was a good case just now.

vote Almaster
3) Asks folist a question, waits 12 minutes (realtime), and then FOS's him without any explanation. What was he doing for those 12 minutes?
Foilist, you aren't reading the thread carefully. Are you trying to find scum, or trying to scrape by?
FOS: foilist13
4) Starts talking about the wagon on me significantly after the fact.
What about this quote at all indicates that gamma gooey has been "researching" all the other players before the start of the game?
5) Contradiction: First, he indicts people who haven't posted yet and says he's keeping careful watch of who posts and who doesn't. Then, a couple hours later, he's saying we can't expect people to post that much.
It's unreasonable to expect people to post more than once a day. This game only got going at all earlier today, so keep that in mind.
6) Asks for other people to comment without actually commenting himself : fishing for popular opinion before committing to any one direction.
I want other people to comment on this.
7) Another contradiction.
@ AGM - where did you go?
I think we need to forgive the lurkers for now, given that it's halloween weekend.
8) References a nonexistent justification for a past vote as a defense. Remember, bob never gave any substantial reason for why he voted for me.
I voted for AGM because he had become scummier than my RVS vote. I don't see why that makes you think I'm scummy, and it is interesting that you haven't posted ANY content of any kind about anyone else.
9)
MOST IMPORTANTLY:
All his posts are just mountains upon mountains of white noise. There is literally NO scumhunting being done, just tons of questions and random comments that make it look like he's contributing when he is not. Seriously, go read him in isolation - he's so incoherent and random it's funny.

I suspect MordyS because of this post:
EBWOP: Early bandwagons are valuable because they immediately start clarifying people's positions, put pressure on players, and force conversation. And in the rare case that someone hammers on the bandwagon, that indicates an instant-scum, since only scum would hammer 3 pages in. A bandwagon does not mean an inevitable lynch. Though considering AlmasterGM's statements so far this game, I wouldn't mind an inevitable lynch.
1) How do they clarify people's positions? This is a false assertion - it doesn't clarify
2) It doesn't put pressure on anyone. I just derailed the bandwagon on me by ignoring it. Moreover, even if it does put pressure, how is this a good thing? Unneeded pressure can force premature claims and is just as likely to cause townies to mess up as it is scum.
3) Why do we need a bandwagon to have conversation? There's been plenty of conversation in this game thus far without your early bandwagon.
4) Early bandwagons aren't dangerous because of the possibility of the quickhammer - they're problematic because they can be hard to stop once they get rolling.

I think this is an attempt by Mordy to recruit followers to the bandwagon on me without having to deal with the obvious flaws in the actual case. By making the wagon a good theoretical idea, he can avoid having to answer any concrete evidence. In some cases, I'd pass this off as stupidity - however, Mordy has been around long enough that I think he should know better. Unexcused badlogic is scummy.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #227 (isolation #7) » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:54 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:Mordy and Spyrex: please don't post a response to AGM yet. I want to see afatchic, Chinaman, Muffin, and cruelty stake out their positions, based on everything that has happened so far.
You know what I want to hear? YOUR position.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #233 (isolation #8) » Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:44 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Gammagooey wrote:Stuff
Defending another player is a MASSIVE scumtell. Let archaebob defend himself.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #236 (isolation #9) » Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:55 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Gammagooey wrote:Feel free to actually, you know, RESPOND to why I think the majority of your case is bullshit and that you are without a doubt in my mind the best lynch candidate for today. Or explain how actively lurking to get a bandwagon on you isn't a scumtell. Or, you could just say something that makes sense.
No. Archaebob is a big boy - he can defend himself. The fact that you defended him is scummy - his ENTIRE strategy this game has been to waffle around in the background and let others do the heavy hitting, and your actions are letting him continue to do this. After I've heard what he has to say, you can have a turn getting mushed.

As far as this "actively lurking" argument goes, I've explicitly stated I was busy for Halloween. I wasn't posting in any of my games during that period. The "derail the bandwagon" argument was merely an observation intending to show that Mordy was wrong. If I actually wanted to lurk the wagon away, do you really think I would've said so to everyone's face?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #245 (isolation #10) » Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:04 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

multiple people wrote:Was that meant to say two or is there a third player you suspect?
It was a half-typo. There is a third player I suspect, but I decided I want to see more from them before I make any judgement call.

1. Essentially, it clarifies people's positions because it forces them to weigh in on the bandwagon one way or another. Are they for it because they believe the participant is scummy? Are they against it because they think she's delivered a towntell? Do they believe the participant is scummy, but they don't think they make a good lynch candidate, etc.
If your argument is that "early bandwagons are good," wouldn't it be sufficient for someone to get on the wagon by repeating what someone else said and saying "early wagons good, so I'll add my vote"? There is absolutely zero justification that anyone is "forced" to do anything - to repeat an argument that was made against me a million times earlier, just because you would act a certain way doesn't mean everyone else will.
But this is inconsequential. It's my personal scumhunting beliefs, and I think bandwagons have been useful in games that I have played. Feel free to disagree, but it's not a scumtell that I disagree with you (just like your scumtell isn't that you believe bandwagons are bad, it's all the other stuff we're about to go into).
Scummy logic is scummy. If I win that early bandwagons are anti-town, then it is very consequential because it means you are pushing an anti-town policy.
2. "It doesn't put pressure on anyone." I think this is self-evidently untrue.
How is it untrue? The discussion on me is because I made a post which some consider to be controversial - it has nothing to do with your "early bandwagon," which contained what, two people?
I just derailed the bandwagon on me by ignoring it." I think this is self-evidently scummy. "
I'm making an observation which disproves your original contention. I think that, at the point where I am admitting to this and using it for a specific reason, it's minimally a null-tell. If I wanted to ACTUALLY avoid attention, why would I make this argument?
Moreover, even if it does put pressure, how is this a good thing? Unneeded pressure can force premature claims and is just as likely to cause townies to mess up as it is scum." Also self-evidently untrue.
It's going to be your argument that will be the "self-evidently untrue" one if I'm lynched this round.
3. I think this is a good place to fit in that: The bandwagon reason for voting for you was only the second reason I had for making the vote! You've totally ignored the first reason (which was your utter logic fail). The second reason just made me comfortable voting on something that I was unsure about (as I had afatchic's defense in mind from the beginning). Ie: Even if I was wrong, and your fail logic was just bad towning, I'd still get valuable information out of the wagon. And lo and behold: I FEEL I DID!
How does this respond to my argument at all? My point is we don't need a bandwagon to have conversation, which is proven by the fact that there's 9 massive pages of text that have nothing to do with the "wagon" on me.
4. Early bandwagons aren't dangerous because there's a threat of someone being hammered, they're dangerous because there's a threat that the target will be lynched? Um. Okay? I think there's an obvious tautology here, but ignoring that for a moment: You weren't a random target! I thought your earlier posts were scummy and I think you continue to act scummy. I wouldn't have cried myself to sleep if you were lynched.
It's not a tautology - you can disprove my argument by showing that early wagons frequently reverse. My contention is that they do not - if an early wagon gets enough steam, it won't undo itself because no one person will have the political capital needed to move everyone to a new target. As far as your second argument goes: irrelevant. Ignoring the possibility that someone claims scum or something similar, early wagons are bad whether the target is random or not because you are unlikely to be sure of anything at an early point in the game and risk the harms I've outlined.

You keep evading the basis of my argument - I'm not indicting you because you voted for me, I'm indicting you for supporting this "early bandwagons good" theory which I think is scummy. I don't care who your target is.
Yay! Some meat. Ok, AlmasterGM, here's why you're newly appointed Scum Target #1.
I will admit, this is a well concocted argument. I'm going to need some extra time to break it down and analyze it.
cruelty wrote:Really? I have a couple issues with your Mordy case (most notably the hypocrisy of bringing up an old case when you pinged archaebob for doing the same thing) but I'd prefer to let him defend himself before I weigh in too heavily.
Hypocrisy doesn't make arguments go away, it just cross-applies them to whoever is making them. I'll take the hit, I still think archaebob is scum.
GG wrote:I don't think you meant to. I think you slipped while trying to make a case against Mordy.
Is this a joke?
foilist13 wrote:@Almaster - Your case was pretty weak. I don't have a lot to add on top of MordyS and Gammagooey, but I can send you to some meta where Archaebob is scum, and another where he is town. In both of these he interspersed content posts with one liners in a very similar manner to which he is doing now, except here there is less content than there normally is.
"I always do it" isn't an excuse. Scummy behavior is scummy. If you are in this game and you are on the town side, your should be trying to make the town win.
Oh and defending another player is not necessarily scummy. We're trying to find the scum and avoid lynching town, so if we see someone we think is town be accused of scum it would be logical to defend them if you think the argument is faulty. It is not the defense itself, but the quality of defense. You have to distinguish between legitimate town defense and scum defense.
False. Defending someone else, except in extremely rare and specific circumstances, is scummy. Half of the point of cases isn't to prove the truth of the matter, but to see what the other person has to say about it. By answering for that person, we hear what YOU have to say, not what they have to say (and anything they say in the future will be tainted by the fact that they already know your response).
SpyreX wrote:Mordy, will you be my bff this game? <3
Obv-buddying is noted.
archaebob wrote:@ Gammagooey - gotta say, not the best move defending me just now. i didn't need it, and I was hoping to see how others would respond to AGM's case without anymore direction from the players who have been posting most so far. You did a good job tearing apart AGM's case, but now we'll never know what afatchic, Chinaman, or Muffin might have revealed in their uninfluenced decision to support or reject it.
Seriously, this is my case in point. Archebob has managed to COMPLETELY evade responding to ANYTHING I said. Gammagooey, I don't even care if you're right or not - you've done the town a total disservice with your actions.
bon wrote:I'm still waiting on those three: fatchic, Chinaman, and Muffin. I really would encourage the town to abstain from engaging any further until we have heard from them, as all we are accomplishing is letting them see clearly who is on what side, and where it is safest to enter.
You want us to stop talking so you can know EXACTLY where to put your vote? This post literally screams scum. If I could trade my life for yours right now, I would, and it would be totally worth it.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #316 (isolation #11) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:30 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

He has not posted since then. This is his MO. He comes under fire and then disappears until the heat is gone. Not one of you, except for Muffin (who I'm about to rip apart so hard that his scum-juice comes loose) has even apparently tried to reconcile his super-scumminess with your lack of pressure on him. I don't know what the hell is going on. I mean, town rarely lynches scum on the first day, so I guess maybe the notion of hitting the scum jackpot immediately is new to many of you. But can we please not let this dude ride under the radar to avoid culpability for his actions. Here's a one-two punch for all you bloody archaebob voters: Archaebob answers attacks on him, AlmasterGM DOES NOT. Put that in your scum-pipe and smoke it.
It's going to be my new signature move … works quite well, I must admit. One thing that strikes me as odd, though, is where this ZOMG SLAM DUNK SCUM argument is coming from. IIRC, you are voting for me using a cross-application of logic I used on Page 1 that I've since dropped. Compelling. Actually, though, the reason I've been taking forever is because I was a) annoyed with your 15-year-old-esk arrogance and b) trying to overcome all the "OMG IT'S SOOOOO TRUE!" rhetoric of that one point in your argument. After getting past all that …
My actual case on you was that you made a super bad case on Gammagooey, one that I felt indicated scumminess."
You've omitted the part where your "actual case" less than one line long. Moreover, your theoretical justification was not presented as an afterthought - it was presented as having equal weight as your "actual case."
You have not yet told me what the obvious flaws in that case are.
Your "case" was simply a one-sentence long assertion that my argument was false. There is no way I can offer any sort of substantive response.
Yet, you end your own post with, "Unexcused badlogic is scummy." THE EXACT CASE I HIT YOU WITH. If attacking someone for apparent badlogic is scummy, then my case on your was excellent! Even if you felt your case wasn't badlogic, you admit in the beginning of your post:
CAPS PLEASE!! The key term is "excused." My initial argument was based on my observations of how I thought people would approach and play the game. After an unofficial poll was taken, I let the argument go because it was clear that my opinion was wrong. I don't see how I can be held accountable for this given that, unless I had done research prior to the game, there would be no other way for me to know whether the argument was wrong or not.
So if you admit the general consensus is that it's not a scumtell, and that general consensus is enough to get you to drop the case (OH MY GOD, BEAR WITH ME, THIS IS ABOUT TO BE AMAZING), then you admit that to a normal member of the general consensus, your case on Gammagooey was bad. If to a normal person (SAY ME, OMG, I HOPE YOU'RE HOLDING ONTO YOUR SOCKS), that case is bad, and as you yourself wrote, "badlogic is scummy," that means (HERE'S THE PITCH) that I was totally justified and validated in your own words for holding you as scummy and voting for you. By your own calculations, my vote on you was completely justified and you deserved it.
OMG MORE CAPS PLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Your vote for me and my vote for Gamma are not the same. My vote: There was no way for me to know the truth or falsity of the matter at hand without making the argument in the first place. After the results came in, I let it go. Your vote: 13 pages later, you're clinging to a statement I made on page 1. You have no other arguments against me. LOL.
If I've expressed the opinion, either explicitly or implicitly through my actions, that bandwagoning can be valuable, and I was Town at the time that I expressed the opinion, obviously that opinion is not a scumtell on me in this game, correct? (This should be very simple, but correct me if I'm missing something obvious.) On Day One of Mini 843 (Fast and the Furious), post 27 (and then later on), I act on the same belief. Not only was I town in that game, but it's a game town ended up winning. So if you believe it's not helpful for townie, you're entitled, and feel free to start a topic on Mafia Discussion to discuss it. But it's a principle I believe, I've used before as town, and I'll continue to use in future games until I believe it's no longer useful. It's not a scumtell.
Mmmmmm …. meta. I'm going to drop my argument, but I still don't like you at all.
BTW AlmasterGM, don't think I forgot about your cute little sneaky appeal to emotion here, "It's going to be your argument that will be the "self-evidently untrue" one if I'm lynched this round." You think you're such a playa, dontcha)
Statement of fact, actually.
I would think that "I always do it" would be an excuse, as by definition it would be a null tell. Please stop making bad arguments...
It's not an excuse to keep engaging in bad behavior. If people tell you something is anti-town, you should stop, not just be like "LOL IT'S MY STYLE!"
I've been working on a post for about thirty minutes trying to explain why this is a scumtell. I've erased like a thousand words discussing linguistics and I'm going to try something simpler. I'm going to explain why it's a scumtell narratively. I was rubbed the wrong way by it that first time I saw it, and what occurred to me was that it's not how I'd expect a player to express that particular thought. I'd expect:
I'm on the debate team. We use that rhetoric all the time in round. That's where it comes from. Seriously, you are stretching REALLY far with your arguments.

Oh yeah, and I'm still not seeing archebob's response to my case (however supposedly bad). All I've got is "Gammagooey did a good job."
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #325 (isolation #12) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:02 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archebob wrote:stuff
I'm scumhunting you. Thus far, you have yet to respond to my posts. You also have yet to do anything very useful except ask a lot of questions, point out who is lurking, and make white noise.
MordyS wrote:(Side point: AlmasterGM, you do literary/linguistic analysis on your debate team? Or you just meant you make narrative arguments? I don't really know what you were trying to add there, except maybe an appeal to authority.)
I was merely trying to explain that the rhetoric "If I win X argument, impact Y occurs" is a catchphrase commonly used on the debate circuit. I didn't actually mean any these insinuations you suggest - I was just using a term I'm familiar with.
(Btw; I love that its 13-pages ago-ness is reason to drop it acc. to AlmasterGM. Maybe if you had dealt with it immediately, we wouldn't be stuck discussing it 13-pages later.).
It's not the number of pages ago that matters so much as what page that number is - 1. The page where everyone else was arguing about whether Pikachu was better than Jigglypuff.
I love the fact, btw, that apparently this game doesn't exist for you outside refuting attacks on you. While you were "overcoming" my rhetoric, and being annoyed with my "15-year-old-esk arrogance," did it occur to you to come into the thread and maybe do some reads, make some arguments and try to scumhunt?
I like my vote where it is until archebob responds. Which he still hasn't. As far as "making arguments" goes, I think I've made more arguments than quite a few people. Here's some people who having contributed extremely lame amounts of substance to the thread:
SpyreX
afatchic
lexprod
It's esque, btw.
Oh notepad, if only you had spellcheck.
Really? Because I haven't seen alot of defense from Archaebob to the different accusations or questions directed at him. I've seen a lot of questions from him and his ever-present lurker-voting, but not much in way of defense. I've seen him expect answers from many others, often immediately, but he seems to reserve himself the right to answer later, and only to certain parts. Mordy, could you help me find all the ones you claim Bob makes.
This. Someone, anyone, show me where Bob has done anything in terms of defending himself.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #326 (isolation #13) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:04 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

So yeah, he should write a defensive thing sometime soon, but he's basically explained that he's most concerned about lurkers. I personally believe that. When I first started playing, I was very concerned about lurkers all the time. (Nowadays I think lurking is anti-game even more than it's anti-town, so I just want mods to handle it, so I don't bother toooooo much with it)
Seriously? It's OK that archebob isn't defending himself because "he's most concerned about lurkers"? How is this in any way an acceptable defense?

If one of you flips scum, the other is totally a buddy.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #328 (isolation #14) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:12 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Sanjay wrote:
Benmage wrote:
Chinaman has requested a replacement and is being replaced by Sanjay.
Isn't he the dude who a fourth of the town has personal vendettas against because of his play in Newbie 846?
I just clicked on this game, and something caught my eye - there were a LOT of people in that game that are now in this game. One of them is archebob. If you read his Town play in that game, it contains much longer, more substantial posts than I'm seeing from him here. Hmmm...

I'm suspicious. I'm also suspicious of the person (forget who it is, but I will go look) who defended Bob saying "he plays this way all the time." Obviously, that is incorrect.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #331 (isolation #15) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:19 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

I'm confident enough not to defend myself right now because I'm convinced that at least two of the scum are already on the wagon. Not enough to quick hammer, I don't think. And if I'm wrong, then I doubt I'm in much danger anyways, as the player to hammer me would pretty much become obvscum.
So you only defend yourself when you're dangerously close to death?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #333 (isolation #16) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:22 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:@ AGM -

Newbie 846 was my second game ever. This is my third game ever. Read that whole game, and take careful note of who wins. Then maybe it might occur to you that I learned a lesson from it, and am trying something different in this game.

If you want to make your argument fairly, then read Newbie 842 (my scum meta), in which I ALSO played differently from this game.
So your takeaway was to be less substantive and not respond to cases?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #335 (isolation #17) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:29 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:@ AGM -

My takeaway is not something I have any interest in sharing with you right now. The important thing is that this game is different from both my scum meta AND my town meta, and therefore nothing about my alignment can be gleaned from past games. Again, keep in mind that this is my third game EVER. It seems silly to suspect a relatively new player for changing up their style a little within their first few games.
1) I don't know what you think your takeaway is, but based on the difference in behavior that I'm seeing, it's "less substance."
2) I love how you're using the noob card to spike out of any possible meta attack. It's like two scum tells in one.

Still waiting for you to respond to my case.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #338 (isolation #18) » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:37 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:@ AGM - your decision to ignore the cases on foilist13 and peanutman predate your case on me. I feel very little obligation to respond to you right now.
So I have to respond to a case not on me before you will respond to a case on you? How does that make any sense?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #361 (isolation #19) » Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:55 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

You don't "have" to do anything. Your decision to ignore the cases made on other people is anti-town, and very scummy. My decision to ignore the case on me might be as well, but I have already explained fully why I am choosing to act this way right now. YOU have not.
How is it scummy? How is it any more anti-town than your current behavior? As far as your "full explanation" goes, it's terrible. I have yet to hear one good reason why not responding to cases on yourself is pro-town. Saying "well since you're doing it, so can I" and then saying I'm scummy isn't a response, it's a self-indictment.

P.S. I want you to answer this question, not other people.
]@AlmasterGm - Set aside defending yourself, and your indignation at being ordered around by Archaebob for a moment. Can you tell us who you think is scum based on something other than playstyles? So far I do not buy your argument against Archaebob, since it seems to be based on meta and you not liking him. Show us some scum tells, show us some contradictions. Give us something to justify the wagon on him.
No. This is Day 1. There was no Night 0. With the exception of scum, nobody in this game knows more than anyone else. Given that fact, there is absolutely no reason we should be blindly accepting these promises of future information. I am not going to divert my attention onto other cases until archebob responds to mine. Once he responds, I'll think about it. The end. Why you continually endorse his evasive behavior is completely beyond me.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #413 (isolation #20) » Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:28 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

This game is too complicated. I might go back and re-read, but this thread is more muddled than the original text of Beowulf, so I'm just going to wait for a wagon to formulate and then decide whether I like it or not.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #424 (isolation #21) » Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:11 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:
AlmasterGM wrote: I'm just going to wait for a wagon to formulate and then decide whether I like it or not.
Haha. Massive FOS @ AGM.

I don't understand why you'd say that, it's almost like you want to be lynched.
I love when people actually take it seriously and are like OMG U R SO SCUMMY IM VOTING 4 U.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #426 (isolation #22) » Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:28 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

AB wrote: Oh, so you were just joking?

Clever...
Not nearly as clever as you, but yes. Anyone who hops on a statement like that is either dumb, scum, or tunneling REALLY hard.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #431 (isolation #23) » Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:06 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:
AGM wrote: Not nearly as clever as you, but yes. Anyone who hops on a statement like that is either dumb, scum, or tunneling REALLY hard.
AGM, give us ONE good reason not to lynch you today. You've decided not to respond to my defense against you, which I accept as an implicit surrender. You have had nothing at all to say about any of the players currently under scrutiny, and nothing intelligent to say about anybody else either. I have yet to see a single pro-town contribution from you, and now it's as if you've completely given up on even trying to avoid being lynched.

So what should we make of you?
Sure. You can say all you want that I haven't done anything pro-town, but I also haven't done anything anti-town. The only actual arguments against me are 1) MordyS's contention that, by my own disproven logic from page 1, I'm scum and 2) Whatever SpyreX posted, which didn't really make sense to me. The reality is that people just implicitly WANT to vote for me because they don't like my arguments. Fine, they can vote that way, but just because I got my arguments beaten back doesn't make me scum. Not every argument posted is going to be a gamebreaker. I did my best to scumhunt, and it didn't have the best results. To come back and say "you're useless and unintelligent and scummy" (with massive loads of sarcasm thrown in for good measure, I might add) is wrong - if I die and flip town, are you all going to say "oh, well we were wrong so we must be scum?" No, you're going to move on, which is what I'm doing. If you want to vote for me, go find an actual reason. "You lost an argument" doesn't count.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #434 (isolation #24) » Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:08 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

P.S. I want to claim at L-1, so don't quickhammer.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #472 (isolation #25) » Mon Nov 09, 2009 2:17 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

AB wrote: I strongly recommend that you make yourself useful doing some sort of scum-hunting. Post your opinions on people. Ask questions. Whether or not you are scum, you are the least costly mislynch right now by like a million miles. You will be lynched today no matter what if that's still true at deadline, and I think you could do wonders for your case by taking steps to change that.
I don’t understand how I am supposed to meet this demand in a pro-town manner. You presume that I was kidding about all my previous arguments or something. Just because they were rebutted doesn’t mean they are deleted. It’s clear base on this statement that what you want me to do is simply post a case against one of the easy targets – Folist or cruelty, for example, already have suspicion on them. Do I agree with those suspicions? Sure, but what does that thought do for this game or me? Mindlessly joining the masses is hardly beneficial for the town…if anything, I’d say it’s more scummy than anything I’ve actually done today.
foliist wrote: @Archaebob - If Almaster pulls his act together and we don't decide to lynch him, who would be your next suspect?
I don’t like this post at all. It does two things – first, it implies that I am being policy-lynched and not scum-lynched, and second, it gives folist a backdoor for unvoting / backpeddeling. This doesn’t flow well with his previously definitive statements that I am scum.
I'm a little confused by this. AlmasterGM seems smart enough that he knows the truism that sarcasm/humor doesn't carry well over the internet (especially when the "sarcasm" is stated so dryly like, "I'm just going to wait for a wagon to formulate and then decide whether I like it or not," that I can't even tell what the humor is).
Anyone incapable of detecting the obvious falsity of that statement is either a) tunneling really hard b) scum or c) really, really, really bad at detecting sarcasm. I don’t care how hard you think it is to read the Internet – that statement was obvious. I also disagree with your analysis that my “joke” was anti-town – to the contrary, it has told us that:

-Peanutman, Foliist, and cruelty are willing to cling to any shred of evidence to get me lynched.
-SpyreX sees it as bussing.
-Bob and Sanjay ignore did.

First option seems most suspicious to me.
MordyS wrote: Anyway, I'm interested to hear what AlmasterGM's claim is going to be, as he already softclaimed vanilla in his iso 6. AlmasterGM, when you claim, if you're not, in fact, vanilla (something I'm assuming from the fact you feel you need to claim any further than that post), can you include the reason why you soft-claimed vanilla in iso 6? Danke!
foilist13 wrote: @Almaster - I think it would be a good time to point out that you claiming some sort of power role won't influence my opinion at all unless it is accompanied by some sort of scum hunting as Archaebob has suggested.
My previous vanilla softclaim was forced. I was questioned on my prior meta, and I had the following options – a) ignore the question, b) tell them to look at my PR meta and implicitly claim prematurely, or c) tell them to look at my town meta. I felt the third option was the best. I don’t think this behavior is scummy, either – it’s not like I hardclaimed vanilla on Day 1 and then tried to claim PR three days later in lylo.
Obviously, you can choose not to believe me if you don’t want to. I don’t see how that would be pro-town, though – it’s Day 1, so taking a gamble is hardly the strategic play.

Anyway, I really want to hear what SocioPath is to say. I think he has good opinions.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #474 (isolation #26) » Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:16 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:I don't want you lynched
Oh really?
I'd consider AGM the least costly mislynch.
Haha. Massive FOS @ AGM.
Not really liking AGM,
I find it interesting that a large part of your defence is basically subjective -'I was joking, and the people who commented on it are obvscum'. It's just poor logic and relies on popular agreement that you were in fact bringing the chuckles and not just being a dumbass. Flaky.
Once again, oh really? Using logic and not just assertions, explain to me how my logic is poor. The point of my statement was not to "bring in the chuckles," it was to see who jumped on it. Also, explain to me how popular agreement is irrelevant given that popular agreement is what was used to disprove my Gammagooey argument in the first couple of pages. Finally, what does subjectiveness have to do with anything?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #494 (isolation #27) » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:48 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:First quote is a response to a hypothetical scenario. Irrelevant, and lol @ using it as ammo. Scrambling much?
I'm using it to disprove a previous statement you made, "I don't want you lynched" - not as ammo. What does it being a hypothetical have to do with anything? Obviously it's going to be a hypothetical - we aren't lynching anyone just yet.
Second quote, eh, guess you could argue that my radar blipped. FoS is not a vote.
So you're willing to FoS me but you don't actually want me lynched. Right...
Third quote is from a post where I voted for foilist. That is, there's no way you can claim that specific post as an example of me trying to lynch you.
Just because you voted foilist doesn't mean you wouldn't also lynch me. Your attitude seems to suggest you are willing to do so.
The reason I call your logic poor (your logic being the people who commented on your wagon post = obvscum) is because it's entirely invalid as a point unless other people are willing to accept that your post was a) not serious and b) deliberate baiting. I could probably concede point A, but I highly doubt that you entertained any thoughts of baiting when you posted it, and I absolutely think that you're trying to paint it as scumhunting (via baiting) in retrospect. Despite this, I still think that foilist is the best lynch candidate for today.
First, why do my intentions at the time of the post matter? Even if the logic is applied retroactively, it still works. Second, what is so dangerous about accepting my statement as-is? Obviously I could be lying scum, but if that's the case, everything I say is going to be false, which would contradict your whole demand that I "be pro-town and contribute something." You're giving me no way to win here.
foilist wrote:Also at no point in this game, except for my very first post of the game, did I in any way indicate that I was not suspicious of Peanut or Almaster, and my first post was just an agreement with Almaster's argument, not a praise or recognition of Almaster himself.
This move confuses me. If you're scum, you know I'm town, so I don't see why you would want to distance yourself from me. I suppose you could be more concerned with getting me lynched and making yourself look good now.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #499 (isolation #28) » Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:54 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

This post is the one where you tell us exactly what your 'joke' post did (most importantly) exposed 3 players as scum which is fine. However, you note that it's sarcastic (ie: not serious) and you NEVER say that it's deliberate bait. This would have been a fine opportunity to, but highly significant is the absence of that claim. Should also note that there are 3 posts between the original post and this one, again, deliberate baiting is never mentioned (despite having received the supposed desired response).
Why is it significant? Why does me missing what you consider a "golden opportunity" mean anything? You're missing soo many internal links here, the most important one being this:
This I read as basically saying that yes, you're applying the logic retroactively. Which is a direct contradiction to your previous post.
It's called a hypothetical - you should be familiar with the concept seeing as you were just talking about it. In any case, you've ignored the actual point -
Why does it matter if the logic is applied retroactively?
It doesn't make it any less true. All you seem to be doing here is trying to make legitimate scumhunting go away based on some technicality. This isn't a criminal trial where the evidence needs to pass a bunch of rules and guilt needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt - it's a game of mafia.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #511 (isolation #29) » Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:58 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

PhaerieM wrote:
AlmasterGM wrote:
This I read as basically saying that yes, you're applying the logic retroactively. Which is a direct contradiction to your previous post.
It's called a hypothetical - you should be familiar with the concept seeing as you were just talking about it. In any case, you've ignored the actual point -
Why does it matter if the logic is applied retroactively?
It doesn't make it any less true. All you seem to be doing here is trying to make legitimate scumhunting go away based on some technicality. This isn't a criminal trial where the evidence needs to pass a bunch of rules and guilt needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt - it's a game of mafia.
Almaster, were you or were you not "applying the logic retroactively"? This is just a bunch of hopping around avoiding the question.
I was not.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #529 (isolation #30) » Wed Nov 11, 2009 4:30 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:I don't believe your claim that it was deliberate baiting. With this in mind, your motives at the time of the post come into question? If, as I believe, it wasn't legitimate scumhunting, then what was it? The logic is, quite simply, ridiculous. You make a stupid post and those that comment on it are scum?it's laughable. It is not a valid point, there is no logic being applied, all you're doing is trying to retroactively justify your own error. The fact that you're backing it up with claims that I'm trying to get you lynched when I'm clearly not further degrades your case.
No warrant, all assertions. Try again.
I'm tired of the feet dragging.

I want a GM lynch. I'm kinda floored by Sanjay's defense at this point in the game, but hey drawin lines is awesome regardless.

We're rehasing old ground and need a flip to keep on pluggin on. I'm absolutely not buying the "VT gambit" and thus I don't even care about a claim :O

Lets get this party started.
Blah blah blah I am so confident in my abilities I can never be wrong! I'll claim: Doctor.

FAQ for those who may need some assistance deciphering this claim:

Q: Premature claims are scummy!
A: Yes, but we only have a week left. If I wait until T-3 to claim, we have no time to do anything. Also, L-2 is hardly premature.

Q: What about your previous vanilla softclaim?
A: See my previous post #25. My options were limited.

Q: You're lying.
A: Theoretically, it doesn't matter what you think, but if you insist on being stubborn then lynch me and have a nice day.

Q: You suck at this game.
A: Fine. I still know how to use my role.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #540 (isolation #31) » Wed Nov 11, 2009 4:51 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

MordyS wrote:Ok, let's skip the VT gambit for a second. Now that you've claimed a PR, wanna answer Gammagooey's original question that you ducked by lying?
Mini 844.
Mini 851.
Mini 863 (ongoing).

Much more aggressive in all of these.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #609 (isolation #32) » Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:38 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Gammagooey wrote:Almaster has a RADICALLY different style for playing as doctor than cop
Meta FTL. Why don't I just play each role the same every single time and make myself 100% predictable?
He soft-claimed vanilla townie despite in fact not being one
I've already gone over this. I'll go over criticisms to it on-topic.
Sanjay wrote:AlmasterGM, if you are a doc why would you do things to actively draw attention to you like your "joke" about how you were going to stop paying attention and your proclamation that you got a wagon off you by ignoring it?
I didn't think either of those statements would cause the chaos they did, and archaebob kept pressuring me to do something useful asap so I tried.
SpyreX wrote:However, I am a huge proponent of "if you're going to lie as town, you better have a damn good reason for it"
Ok, it's not like I hardclaimed VT on Day 1 and then tried to switch to Cop in Day 4 lylo. There was a pressured softclaim that I didn't even want to make a big deal out of. You're completely exploding the issue.
PhaerieM wrote:..... If you truly are the doctor, this is NOT how to use your role. By your ridiculous behavior and bringing so much attention to yourself today, you've just *guaranteed* that you will *never* be able to use your night ability! Either we will lynch you today, you will be NKed as Doc, or you will be RBed as doc. How in the world is that using your role???
So I played badly D1. I still know how to send a PM to the mod - e.g., I can perform my Doctorly functions.

Also, where have you been?
The problem here is that you didn't have to say anything. If you're a doctor, you just had to answer the question of why you're more aggressive in this game than in that game (where you had a PR). Anyway, as Sanjay points out, those Minis don't answer the question anyway. In 844 you're a mason, in 851 you're a VT, and in 863 you're still in orbit. Gammagooey's (it was him, right?) question was: I saw a game you were in where you were cop and were way less aggressive. Your answer was: Check out my VT meta where I've been just as aggressive. (A totally legit defense at the time -- well, legit enough.) But now that you're claiming doctor, his question comes back in full force. I saw a game you were in where you were cop and were way less aggressive. Your answer now is pointing to a game where you were a Mason, a game where you were VT and a game currently in process? Show him (us) a game where you had a PR like cop or doctor and were just as aggressive.
There isn't any. This is my first time playing as doctor, and my second town-PR (not counting Mason as a PR). Obviously, I played it poorly and should have answered is question differently (e.g., more cryptically). That's all I can say.
Sanjay wrote:Vote: AlmasterGM

This dude has the most unexplained things so he's the one I want lynched, doc claim or no.
What happened in-between this post and your last one that caused the massive change in heart?
MordyS wrote:Also, I think AlmasterGM is lying, and I think he's trying to ferret out a real town doctor by claiming town. He hasn't answered a single question I've asked him about his claim (well, he did answer that one with three games, but as Sanjay points out, they actually didn't answer the question at all). Maybe he's hoping that if he remains quiet, the bandwagon will disappear off him again?
I am not trying to dodge questions. If I missed any, please re-quote and I will answer them.

P.S. What is VI?
Sanjay wrote:1. The mafia isn't going to solve the problem for us.
2. If we don't lynch AlmasterGM, every day it's just gonna be "hey, do you want to lynch this dude yet".
OK, so how is this bad for the town? If I'm telling the truth, you get free Doc protection or you waste mafia roleblocks (if they have any). If I'm lying, you get me later. Why, exactly, do I need to die NOW?
4. Docs are great and all, but at best they are a mild inconvenience to the scumteam, especially outed.
So it's OK to lynch because the doc "isn't that good." This is just incorrect.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #652 (isolation #33) » Sat Nov 14, 2009 10:49 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Sanjay wrote:This forced your softclaim? Couldn't you have just mentioned a different game where you were more aggressive? You introduced the distinction between the your PR meta and your VT meta. You totally didn't need to make a big deal of this. Why not just declare "Meta FTL" like you just did now.
I didn't think my comment was going to cause such an uproar later - I thought it would just make the issue go away. I was wrong.
Another question: if you decided being a cop meant you ought to play a more conservative game, why didn't you decide to play a more conservative game as a doctor? It's not an issue of meta. You've expressed the idea that you would play a cop conservatively. Why play a doc differently?
See my answer to your second argument below.
Firstly, you mentioned how much you like lurking your wagons away twice. It didn't go over the first time. Did that stop you the next time? Heck no.
How does this relate to anything?
Secondly, what use did you intend your joke to have? What use did you intend your joke to have that wouldn't involve more attention being paid to you?
This is the exact mentality that is putting me in the predicament I'm in now. This game is extremely aggressive. As PZ pointed out, there have been upwards of TEN cases, and it's only Day 1. I think this can largely be contributed to archaebob's aggressive questioning, but I'm sure there are other factors as well. Playing conservatively is not an option. No matter what I do I'm going to be drawing attention to myself.

You're probably going to come back and say something along the lines of "No, because other people post and look town." My response: How you look is a subjective judgement call made by people you don't know. I was not aware of how to cater to both their town radar and their activity radar at the same time. Or maybe I'm just not as good at mafia as those people.
archaebob wrote:If you believe that AGM is leaving questions unanswered, then please assemble a list of all the ones you think we should make him reply to. From what I can tell, he has addressed all the major contentions to the best of his ability. I don't see what else he could say in his defense that would make any difference, really, and I think he feels the same way. But if you genuinely believe that we're letting him get away with something, I do want to see it.
--
This isn't applicable to AGM, because he is the actual player who the case is against. Also, I think any post of his right now would just be a rehash of things he's already tried to say.
This is exactly how I feel.
1) Who do you think we should lynch today? Why?
Cruelty or foilist. I'm not going to argue why because every time I make arguments it draws more attention to me. Plus, a lot of the args have been made already.
2) Why is your vote still on me?
Mostly because you aren't giving me a lot of flak over it. I want to move my vote to cruelty, but then I'd probably have to deal with him and I don't feel like it.
3) What do you think of foilist13 and peanutman?
Peanutman - I didn't like how quickly he jumped on my wagon over that dumb post I made, but other than that I'm getting a fairly neutral read.

foilist13 - If it's me vs him, I obviously choose him. However, everyone else seems to think there's a lot to gain from his lynch. I'm not really sure what those gains are. I do think he's made a boatload of dumb posts/arguments, but seeing as I made a lot of those myself, I'm not really in a position to comment.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #715 (isolation #34) » Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:14 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Unvote. Vote: cruelty.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #727 (isolation #35) » Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:37 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

:(

Unvote. Vote: foilist
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #807 (isolation #36) » Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:52 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

This game has amazed me.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #821 (isolation #37) » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:13 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Unvote. Vote: SocioPath.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #830 (isolation #38) » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:52 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:Huh, guess I wasn't around for the end of the day.

AGM's last 4 posts have contained 1 inane sentence and 3 unexplained votes, he's been scummy all day and HE gets to hammer? Sigh.
It just blows your brains, doesn't it?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #831 (isolation #39) » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:52 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:Huh, guess I wasn't around for the end of the day.

AGM's last 4 posts have contained 1 inane sentence and 3 unexplained votes, he's been scummy all day and HE gets to hammer? Sigh.
It just blows your brains, doesn't it?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #836 (isolation #40) » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:04 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Benmage wrote:
SocioPath Mafia GodFather has been lynched on D1.

Seriously ... LMAO.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #838 (isolation #41) » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:12 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:I don't really have a clue what's going on here anymore. Why is foilist suddenly not a viable lynch candidate?
archaebob wrote:Sociopath is a replacement. What justification is there for lynching him? You think his lurking is at all an indication of him being mafia?

This makes very little sense. Can people please explain why foilist/AGM is suddenly not a good lynch anymore? I'm very suspicious of all these sudden wagon hops.
SpyreX wrote:BTW, if [SocioPath] is scum [archaebob is] dead.
Hmmmm...

I am still in disbelief over Day 1.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #863 (isolation #42) » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:11 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

I want to hear who cruelty wants to lynch today. From cruelty. And I want the post to be offense, not defense or pointless comments.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #872 (isolation #43) » Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:18 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:AGM - who do I want lynched? You. I don't believe your claim, I don't like your wishy washy voting (especially at the end of yesterday). I think your play is horribly opportunistic and I think that you've lied on a few occasions (specifically re: "that" post). You also tried to push a case on me based on your misrepresentation of something I said (least costly mislynch). I don't like misrepresentation.
First, why the giant turnaround since our argument yesterday when you posted (with the bold being part of the original quote, btw):
cruelty wrote:re: 1, 2 and 3. I think you are suspicious.
I do not want you lynched today.
I have said why, and I'll say it again. I think we will gain more information from foilist's lynch (with regards to his interactions with peanut, archaebob and yourself) than we will from lynching you. This is why I'm opposed to your lynch today.
Foilist is still alive. So are peanut, archaebob, and myself. Please explain what has changed between then and now (hint: this means that you can't quote posts from before your "I don't want to lynch you" post as evidence, because those wouldn't be new developments).

Second, if anything is opportunistic, it's your vote on me. You've done nothing in terms of evaluation or scumhunting like everyone else wants you to and are simply jumping on the hate-AGM-wagon from yesterday. This might be passible, except you spent all of yesterday saying how you didn't want me lynched and wanted to lynch foilist. You have convinently set yourself up this entire game so you minimize commitment and always appear on the obv-wagon.

Vote: cruelty
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #876 (isolation #44) » Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:07 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:@AGM: From a information-for-town standpoint, you're probably not a great lynch. From a 'who-do-I-think-is-scummy' standpoint, then you're in a league of your own. Who do I
want
lynched? You. Who do I think is the
best
lynch? I'll answer that later today.
So I'm "deliberately anti-town" because I move my vote around when it really doesn't matter anyway, but your use of semantic games that makes your intentions, actions, and position obscure and hard to evaluate isn't?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #880 (isolation #45) » Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:48 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:
AlmasterGM wrote: So I'm "deliberately anti-town" because I move my vote around when it really doesn't matter anyway

No.
Then explain.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #905 (isolation #46) » Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:54 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Papa Zito wrote:
PhaerieM wrote:MordyS's posts just got a lot scummier
?

Out of curiousity, AGM, who did you protect last night?
You.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #951 (isolation #47) » Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:10 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Sorry for the flake; will post as soon as possible. Barring some startling revelation, however, I don't think I'm moving my vote.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #984 (isolation #48) » Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:21 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

ab wrote:WIFOM.
WIFOM fallacy.
AB wrote:Heads I win tail you lose. This is unfalsifiable, and ignores, as cruelty rightly pointed out,
that he has not talked about many players in this thread.
It also ignores the fact that peanutman has said just as little about AGM and foilist, except when directly pressured.
Bolded part is scummy on cruelty's part.
So vote peanutman. This is WAY more compelling than anything I've seen for cruelty.
Why are you so interested in getting votes off cruelty?
cruelty wrote:If I flip town, what information do you get?
You keep pushing this dumb "information" issue. This doesn't even matter - we should be lynching SCUM, not people who we think we'll get lots of information from. You're scummy, and are lynchable. The end.
ab wrote:cruelty, why don't you suspect/want me lynched anymore?
Because he likes shifting his advocacy all the time so you can't pin him down on anything later.
ab wrote:All of you, 'splain please. I'm not seeing the case here.
LOL, are you serious?
ab wrote:Also, what happened to wanting AGM lynched?
Once again, he likes shifting his advocacy all the time so you can't pin him down on anything later.
ab wrote:1) I don't have an obsession with "political capital". Whatever "power" I might have had in the town yesterday was due simply to several players deciding they thought I was town after I linked foilist's meta in this thread. This was not something I could have planned for.
The fact that you even know what this means and are on the debate team makes me think you are quite knowledgeable about it and are actively using it. Mmmmm…Politics DA.


1) What archebob thinks we should do today. E.g., I want offense, not abstract responses to posts or promises.

2) Why the hell is cruelty voting Peanutman? All we have is
his is my biggest issue; peanut's lynch will give us information both ways
Seriously? We are lynching based on "information?"

Happy with my cruelty vote.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1000 (isolation #49) » Tue Dec 01, 2009 2:55 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Forgot to include this from last time:
cruelty wrote:I don't think an AGM lynch is really beneficial - there's the nagging possibility that he IS the doctor, and I don't think he's good enough to be able to win the game as mafia from this point. I think he's the scummiest and I want him lynched the most, but I'm trying to be as objective as possible and I can't see how his flip will be that informative. And I hate that.
This makes no sense and literally SCREAMS fencesitting.
cruelty wrote:I'll see your argument and raise you a reflection. You (amongst others) have been consistently more scummy than me, and the case against me is based more on things I haven't done than anything concrete that I have. The information thing is a byproduct of this, and I don't think it's valid.
Nice job dodging my argument by bolding one unimportant sentence of it. My point is that, regardless of who is scummier, you don't seem to be concerned with it. You (among others) have continually pushed "information upon flip" as a justification for a lynch. This is a terrible idea because 1) we have no promises this supposed information is accurate and 2) we should be lynching SCUM.
cruelty wrote:Yawn. Been over this, but my votes have been consistent and backed up by reasoning. Yours (again, amongst others) have not.
Once again, you're avoiding the argument. Even if your votes have been backed up, you still appear hesitant to commit to any one position. Your justifications have frequently been (intentionally?) obscure and hard to pin down. This is scummy.
The problem with you and foilist is that your absolute conviction in my guilt is as much a product of your own scumminess (and therefore the heat that has been directed your way by virtually everyone in the game at some point or another) as it is mine. The presence of both of you on my wagon is a fairly blatant attempt to push the 'easy' lynch and ensure your survival. This is opportunistic.
Fallacious dismissal based on appeal to character.
I also note that you have also been horribly tunneled on me today. In fact, looking through your iso, the absolute entirety of your "scumhunting" has been 99% directed at me. Even your questions re: archaebob have mostly been regarding me.
So?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1005 (isolation #50) » Tue Dec 01, 2009 5:09 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

ab wrote:Where's the fallacy?
Everything is WIFOM at some level. The dismissal of an argument simply because there is a degree (however small) of WIFOM is a bad idea.
It's also scummy on your part, peanutman's part, and foilist's part. Why the special treatment?
Fine, it applies to other people. This doesn't make the argument go away. Cruelty gets special attention because I think he's the best lynch for today.
I agree that there is no information to be had in particular from you flipping town. I also agree that given the choice, we should lynch scum, rather than some who's informative. What you are forgetting is the fact that we don't know for SURE who is scum, but we can be reasonably sure about what flips will give us information. Given two players that are equally likely to be scum, it makes sense to choose the one who's flip will be more informative.
That's fine, but I feel as though information-on-flip is starting to become a primary justification for lynch rather than a second thought. It should be used to break ties, not from the getgo. IMO, Cruelty isn't using it the right way.
or as a particularly informative lynch.
Who would be an informative lynch and why?
I can't parse what this means at all.
Let me rephrase: Who do you think we should lynch today?
cruelty wrote:I'm not fencesitting with regards to you. That's a laughable line to take. I've explained why I don't want you lynched today. Post 998. I haven't once changed my tune about you and there are valid reasons as to why I think you're a bad lynch.
Oh really? Allow me to predict what you will say if I'm lynched.
I flip scum - "I've had Almaster at the top of my scumlist from the beginning."
I flip town - "I told you guys we shouldn't have lynched Almaster and that he was a bad pick."
You can say you don't want me lynched, but there's tons of anti-me sentiment laced in there and, most importantly, you
keep bringing it up
when people ask you who you think is scummy. You are definitely playing both sides here.
ab and cruelty wrote:cruelty is consistent.
His votes are, but his opinions aren't.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1010 (isolation #51) » Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:18 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:I don't want you lynched. I think you're scummy.
I'm having a bit of trouble wrapping my head around it because generally the point of the game is to lynch the scummy people. Also it doesn't help that you aren't advocating a lynch at all despite the wealth of information in this thread.[/quote]
Precisely.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1011 (isolation #52) » Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:22 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Also, do you honestly think I currently have the town cred to be able to push the lynch of a claimed doc?
Ok, seriously, this whole political capital thing has got to stop. Repeatedly using it as an excuse to not do things is unacceptable.

P.S. This is yet another episode of wishy-washy from cruelty.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1017 (isolation #53) » Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:03 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

ab wrote:He's using poor wording today with this whole "I want you lynched, but I don't think we should actually lynch you" business, but I think it means basically the same thing he was saying before. AGM is scummy, but not a good lynch for the town. There's no contradiction.
Semantics matters.

Also, we are all still waiting for you to vote (or do anything offensive, for that matter).
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1021 (isolation #54) » Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:51 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Gammagooey wrote:Oh hai.

archae-So you think cruelty is town. I don't agree with that, so to rephrase Almaster's question, Who's the best lynch and why?
Wow, talk about actively lurking. Could you possibly have come any quicker (and said any less) when called?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1024 (isolation #55) » Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:29 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

Gammagooey wrote:I was actually posting when he posted that, added the oh hai to acknowledge it.
So it took you 5 minutes to rephrase a question I had already asked?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1054 (isolation #56) » Fri Dec 04, 2009 8:22 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

cruelty wrote:ut I think of it like having an ugly girl as backup in case you can't score the hot one - we have the numbers and town momentum right now to go after the other scum player
This is seriously one of the best mafia analogies EVER.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1067 (isolation #57) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:53 am

Post by AlmasterGM »

I like how it's 6 days until the deadline and we still don't know who archaebob wants to lynch.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1090 (isolation #58) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:40 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

MordyS wrote:EBWOP: Sorry for the flooding of messages but one more thing I think I should mention: I'm assuming that either 1) Scum don't have a roleblocker or, 2) AlmasterGM-scum can't claim he's been roleblocked tomorrow since he didn't claim he was roleblocked last night, and presumably, if scum had a roleblocker, they would have blocked the exposed doctor. (Which would eliminate the possibility of a successful protect, not to mention would make AlmasterGM look even scummier if he claimed being roleblocked.)
I was just about to say this. While I will most certainly protect Peanutman tonight, this does not ensure his safety. I'm hoping, however, that the presence of a Godfather means the scumteam has no additional power roles (especially seeing as it doesn't appear that the town has a Vig, unless they chose not to kill last night, which would be a weird move).
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1095 (isolation #59) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:23 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

PM sent. I don't get how the answer is going to help us, though.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1098 (isolation #60) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:46 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

MordyS wrote:Hopefully he'll answer in the thread. Anyway, here's how it helps us: If you can be roleblocked without getting a message about it, then they can roleblock you tomorrow night and kill the cop (assuming there's a roleblocker). This is important to analyzing tonight's actions. If you do get a message when you're blocked, that means they didn't roleblock you last night, which suggests to me that either they don't have a roleblocker, or you're lying about being doctor. If however you're normally not informed, we can't make those conclusions.
Gotcha, good point. However, someone else should really PM the mod as well, because if I'm scum, I can just lie about the answer he gives. I'll say right now that I received no PM last night.

That being said, I think we are being shortsighted right now. All we are talking about is who we want to lynch today. We also need to talk about who we want Peanutman to investigate. Here's a list of potential targets. In my opinion, we are looking for someone who meets the following criteria:

a) Isn't strongly connected to today's lynch. We want to maximize the spread of information we receive.
b) Isn't too pro-town. Town flips are much less useful than scumflips. Also, we want to increase the length of the scum NK list (which usually contains pro-town players and cleared players - investigating a pro-town player gives them a 2 for 1).
c) Isn't too scummy. They are probably going to by lynched soon anyway.

This rules out:

AlmasterGM - already investigated.
Peanutman - claimed cop.
Papa Zito - townish.
MordyS - townish.
cruelty - scummy / lynch today.
archaebob - closely connected to cruelty.

Leaving us with:

Gammagooey - Good pick.
PhaerieM - Hesitant to waste this here because she was early on the SP wagon.
Sanjay - Good pick.
foilist13 - Too controversial / discussed player - since practically everyone said something about this guy, there's too many connections for us to analyze or get anything out of a town flip.

I'm going to suggest Sanjay. He's good at defending himself, so trying to take him down via casing would be difficult. A scum flip would make this unnecessary. A town flip would give us more information on archaebob. I could also see Gammagooey as a decent investigation.

Thoughts?

P.S. - Voting wise, I still like cruelty.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1100 (isolation #61) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:52 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Sanjay wrote:Oh damn, I forgot I was good at defending myself.

Vote: Sanjay
lol wtf?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1103 (isolation #62) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:54 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Sanjay wrote:Basically I think your reasoning for my lynch is a little silly, AlmasterGM.
Basically, I think you need to learn to read.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1122 (isolation #63) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:10 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

I'd like to take a short recess from MordyS v. Archaebob to discuss the following:
Sanjay wrote:I guess by trying to get the investigation elsewhere I'm just making it more likely I'm going to be investigated, but I'd really rather someone else be investigated.

Why are we even talking about this? We've got a deadline lynch to consider.
Does anyone else find this post
incredibly
scummy?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1128 (isolation #64) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:23 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Sanjay wrote:I really do think that we probably shouldn't even be talking about the investigation.
MordyS wrote:I agree with this assertion. Cop should investigate who he finds suspicious and tell us tomorrow.
This is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. Yes, let's minimize town coordination in a game of uninformed majority vs informed minority! That'll get us the win! Not to mention the fact that (no offense intended) Peanutman's cop strategy last night wasn't exactly stellar, so leaving it totally up to him again might not produce A+ results.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1130 (isolation #65) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:27 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Do you think Sanjay's attempt to shy a cop investigation away from himself is scummy?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1136 (isolation #66) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:41 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

I just got a PM back from Benmage. I will NOT be informed if my protection attempt is unsuccessful.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1138 (isolation #67) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:45 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Yo, can we do another last minute wagon, except this time onto archaebob?
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1175 (isolation #68) » Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:32 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Things I find amusing that the last two pages have been entirely about MordyS and archaebob, but cruelty comes in and starts talking about Foilist.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1210 (isolation #69) » Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:22 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

I have to produce 20 pages of text on Plato's Republic by tomorrow at 4:30. There will be no more posts until then.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1211 (isolation #70) » Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:22 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

From me, that is.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1325 (isolation #71) » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:50 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

It's almost 5am and I should be finishing this paper, but instead I decided to procrastinate and read the thread.

Re: MordyS v. Archaebob. I think MordyS wins.

Unvote. Vote: archaebob.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1388 (isolation #72) » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:54 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

It occurred to me that I'm probably going to die tonight, so if anyone wants to know anything from me, ask now.

The one bit I do have to say is that I think it's extremely possible foilist is just dumb and is not actually scum (catchy rhyme, eh?) Maybe I'm saying this because everyone accused me of being scum on D1 when in reality I had just made some mistakes, but I call em as I see em. Not everyone is ungodly good at this game. Keep that in mind.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1391 (isolation #73) » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:59 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

archaebob wrote:right. just "remind everyone". very subtle.

if peanutman inspects Mordy and says that he's town, then he's confirmed naive cop.
Your confidence is overwhelming.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1393 (isolation #74) » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:10 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Naive cop in a Mini with a vigless town and mafia Godfather would be pretty lamesauce.
User avatar
AlmasterGM
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
AlmasterGM
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 4471
Joined: May 29, 2009

Post Post #1715 (isolation #75) » Thu Jan 07, 2010 1:43 pm

Post by AlmasterGM »

Good game, everyone. PZ: that was pretty damn impressive.
Locked

Return to “Completed Mini Normal Games”