Newbie 934 - Game Over!

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

All right, my analysis. This is basically an recap of the event where I basically response to quotes. Now please note, I will not be replying to me or Robocopter87, since you probably already know my opinion on him. I will mention him in my conclusional analysis. The analysis will go from oldest to newest posts. Okay, let's begin:

You're lamenting lack of talk in the thread, but you haven't answered any of the random questions yourself. I'd rather be posting more often too, but if only half the players start doing most(or all) of the talking, Mafia have ample opportunity to hide or, simpler still, just coast to a win.

Incorrect, he already has done that. However, the rest of your statement is very good. I really do like it when people actually contribute to the thread (I despise inactivity).

Seriously? You are voting on him because we asked him something and he answered, and he had bad grammer... I hope you know that you spelled grammar wrong.

Thank you for pointing that out to me. My response was wrong and unecessary.

Where did I do this? If anything I called him out for posting too much (with too little content, having missed the questions in his quote boxes).

No offense, but that post really didn't make any sense. Can you attempt to clarify that?

Alright, I can tell this threads gonna move fast. Here's a list of timezones, it seems to be kinda standard-ish in other threads.

Shadsticle - GMT
Matteh - GMT
Eklipse - GMT -5 (eastern)
Super Smash Bros. Fan - GMT -6 (central)
Coach Travis - GMT -5 (eastern)
mb53 - GMT -7 (mountain)
Charlie - GMT +8
Robocopter87 - GMT -5 (eastern)
Nachomamma8 - GMT -5 (eastern)

@Robo is winding people up part of your play style? All your posts in both the games we've been in really bug the crap out of me.

Very glad that you pointed that out. This could be the reason why the game is going well overall and does not suffer from inactivity like in other games at times.

Mb53's first analysis is too long for you to bother reading. I will say it is an good analysis and it's the first post I've came across that gave some serious contents outside of the RVS stage.

My god. I read ten pages of a game with him in it, and I wanted to throw myself into a wall. I feel bad for the people who were playing with him.

This is why grammar used to be an scumtell to me. They can make information and posts difficult to interperate.

I have a feeling I won't, since I'm not really accustomed to playing with you all. We'll see how everything plays out, I'm personally eager to see if I stick to this as well.

Luckily, the feeling that you would be inactive wasn't really the case.

Sorry, I've been kinda busy today. Man, this is moving faster than the other games I was in, much faster. Anyway, someone will have to explain how to use quotes, because I couldn't figure that out(struggled with it on other forums as well).

But to respond to mb53:Honestly, lots of people automatically get scummy vibes from me, it's really strange. It's happened in my other two games as well, so nothing new there. Anyway, I have heard of Random Voting and Random Questioning, but I guess because I've never played here I never saw them abbreviated like that, so that's probably what confused me. I won't even pretend to be a newbie(to the game, I'm obviously a newbie to the site), because I do have a good amount of knowledge about the game.

I never really saw the point of Random Questioning, as you can't that much out of it, where with random votes I've seen times where you get unexpected reactions that help give leads.

Speaking of RV's, time to pull off my first one of the game:

Vote:Eklipse

To use quotes, do {quote="Insert name here}{/quote}, but replace { and } with [ and ]. Hope that helped.

The point of Random Question Stage is to get information from other people so we're likely to make less mistakes in the long run. Random Voting Stage sounds more fun, but it leads to more mistakes and more potential for an scum win.

Also, why did you vote for Eklipse as an random vote when mb53 already gave an serious vote? I know I did the same thing later, but nevertheless, please elaborate.

Oh, and my answer wasn't in less than a minute:SSB explained it a couple minutes before you put the links up, and I immediately responded to that. So I never even saw the wikis until after my answer. But the point is, I knew exactly what Random Voting and Random Questioning were, I just never saw stage added at the end of them, so I didn't know the abbreviations. Again, I was playing somewhere that wasn't as devoted to mafia, so I didn't have experts explaining every little detail about the game, and I actually learned more from reading games on other forums than I did playing.

Now I understand it was an mistake, but before playing the game, you should have read the wiki about abbreviations, so you wouldn't get confused about the game.

Oh yes, a RVS! I want to:
vote: Eklipse because he likes replacing c's with k's.

And can someone tell me how a RQS gives you a read on someone?

We already have our first truly informed vote, so it would really be an good idea if you made an more informed vote then you did. Also, like I explained before, RQS can gather more information then would RVS and leaves less room for mistakes. Can't believe that as an SE you think RQS doesn't help with giving reads on someone.

@CT/Charlie a rehash of an earlier question - we have now had TWO informed votes - do you think an RVS is wise now a serious disussion has started?

Glad that somebody finally pointed out to both of them that RVS's are useless during serious discussions.

Yeah, you act like this in all your games, so that's why I haven't voted you yet. You're just trying way too hard to be 'wacky' and 'random', and it really annoys me.

Great counterattack. Also note that it makes little sense whatsoever.

Probably the most anti-town example of this 'style'. If you're not bothered to review the threads you play in (you implied the same last thread), why don't you just stop playing?

This. I pointed this out multiple times in the game and I'm glad to know that somebody else noticed.

Answers to questions must be evaluated much more carefully for scum, and it's more likely to see a slip. This is actually the first game where I was present for an RVS(well half an RVS). It seems Eklipse is on L -2 because of it, so at least I can have a look at the last two votes on him now. Maybe RVS is more useful after all! A combination perhaps. Worth noting that I think mb53 is right. We've had informed votes, in my eyes RVS is over.

I disagree with RVS being useful when we have an serious discussion, but you do have a very good point there. A combination of RQS and RVS wouldn't hurt us, right?

Overall, really great post there. Full of contents, great counterattack against Robocopter87, and a good explination about your opinion on RVS and RQS.

I don't necessarily think that it gives you a read on someone through their role, but rather a read on the type of gameplay they're going to bring to the table/what type of player they are. RQS sort-of starts off the game with a set amount of questions that people feel obligated to answer, rather than necessarily starting it off on a lighter, more joking note. You can sometimes read into peoples answers that have played before and see how they respond (if it differs), but that might be seen as metagaming. Personally, I prefer RQS over RVS because it has a defined point... and where I've played in the past RVS can last up to 11 pages. It all depends on how you comprehend the answers you receive, I guess.

Oh sweet. A L-2 bandwagon on page 3.

vote: Matteh

because I can't figure out how to pronounce your name and it's really bugging me.

Nice that you actually explained to to Charlie about RQS, but I don't like that you did an Random Voting at the same time as giving an serious response.

So... we still random voting or what? For the record, my vote so far is informed(as can be at this stage).

We we shouldn't be, that's for sure.

If it's a random vote, why stack it on a player that already has two votes? And if you're using lurking as a reason, can you quote where he said he would lurk? I can't find it except that he says he won't be very active on Wednesdays.

'Days' last 3 RL weeks or so in most Newbie games, so missing a day or two here and there is valid and necessary, and not a tell from most players.

If you want to find all of a player's posts in a thread, select their name from the menu at bottom. This is called an ISO, and it's handy to do a recap on a player you want to make a case for.

Because I never thought I would be putting Eklipse at L-2? Yeah, not a good explaination. And this is where Eklipse said he might lurk:

I'm hoping that I'll be active, but sometimes I get defined as a lurker.

However, I do thank you for the suggestion.

Bad logic. If he gets prodded then us putting him at L-1 will make no difference, he'll either respond and remain in the game or not-respond and get replaced, whether we put 1 vote on him or 5.

Basically I think LaL(urkers) is bad. However active lurkers are often decent targets, imo. Inactive lurkers just arent worth the lynch if they're going to end up replaced anyway.

I actually do agree with the counterattack here. It reveils that I need to learn what lurkers to target and what to avoid. Also using good logics.

Unvote

Vote: Super Smash Bros. Fan

I do not like your reasoning behind suspicious/votes at all. You are jumping around way too much, with no reasons. Lets review.

First suspicion: Matteh because of grammar and not liking RQS. This was a real vote btw, not RVS.

Second: FoS on shad because he only posted twice (while people still only posted once), missreading, and not being impressed with his initial defense (whatever that means...) Next post he unvotes.

Third: Jumps back to RVS, voting eklipse (putting him at L-2 which he claims he didn't know he did. How could you not know?), even after he made a real vote. Yet even though he says it is RVS, he gives a serious reason.

Fourth: Unvotes, FoS on Nacho for not posting enough, and FoMS on robo for his play style (confusing weird posts. By the way, I love your play style robo, keeps the game fun.)

Too many flawed reasons, too much jumping, and goes back into (the pointless) RVS, which just wastes time.

Really good reasons for voting me originally. Everything you said are very good and you posted your reasons in great details.

Read post #98 for Nachomamma8's post. It's really good.

unvote, vote SSBF

!Danger L-2!

Originally, wanted to call him out for consistantly mispelling Eklipse with Ekclipse. But now, leaning favourable towards Nachomamma8's case on him.

Shadesticle, who are your prime and second suspects?
Robocopter87, what are your opinions on Eklipse?

Can't think of more probing questions. I'll come back later in around 12 hours.

The fact that you voted on me because of what Nachomamm8 said is quite sad. Try finding something else to throw against me.

@ElectricBadger- Good luck to you with your surgery.

unvote

since RVS is over and there's no reason for a vote to be on him at the moment. He doesn't seem suspicious at all imo.

Anywho, sorry I've been absent a lot. As I said, I work on Wednesdays so it might be a tiny bit hard for me to get on and post anything of quality towards the game (or read anything over to be honest. But alas, I am here.

Is there any game style that's against it?

I'm not too familiar with everything, but I don't really think that there's any type of style that's against it. I could be really wrong though.

can you quote where he said he would lurk?

*sigh* I'm supposing he's taking that me saying I tend to get labeled as a lurker that he actually meant that

I would

be a lurker and lurk this topic. Which isn't necessarily the case, and I do try to be as active as I can be. Promise.

let's get him back on the game where he belongs.

Mind explaining what exactly you meant by getting me back on the game where I belong?

I also don't understand all the hype from SSBF about trying to put an FOS on people who haven't posted frequently. I mean yeah, sure, that could be labeled as lurking, but we're still

soo

early in the game process that trying to place pressure on someone who isn't attentive to the RVS just seems like sort-of a ridiculous gameplay. If it becomes an increasing problem I can see the issue, but as of now it just seems like you're trying to do one of two things i) place pressure on those who aren't active and get them to post more

or

ii) push for a lynch and try to move the game along quickly. Which personally comes of as scummy in my mind because you're attempting to (what it seems like) get a quick lynch and start the night process. Nachomamma wasn't active for 48 hours (or whatever), but in the grand scheme of things that isn't really that long of a time. It's generally the quality of responses over the quantity of the posts which are added to this game.

@SSBF- I'm confused at certain posts and points you've made in the game so far. While you do post a large

quantity

of responses, I'm not exactly sure I understand what some of them mean let alone why you're choosing to say certain things such as:

To be fair, I had no idea that I actually was putting Ekclipse at L-2. It's probably because I'm not too familar with the F11 setup (I talked to people about it in the Muppet Mafia in Smash World Forums and people tore me up because of it, leading me to being the closest to lynch now, but that's a converstation for another day), so

maybe that's why I did an RVS vote on Ekclipse.

and even after Shadsticle asked about this, I still don't understand your thought process. You seem antsy for a lynch. I agree fully with what mb53 stated in his post (91.)

I dislike just typing and all, but at this point I don't feel inclined to put SSBF at L-1. I do find him suspicious, but I'd at least like to give him some time to answer some questions and such. *directs more attention to this game*

Fantastic post there. I really do apperatice that. Tons of content, good reason for suspicion, and strong questions to ask.

I think part of my nervousness comes from the fact that I'm coming off a game where I was a townie, and was the first lynched, no matter how well I was doing defending myself. So the early vote here scared me(because it felt like it could be deja vu), and it made me overly cautious, I think. I'll try and avoid that as we go on.

Anyway, I agree with the case on Super:His voting hasn't really made sense, he really should have noticed the state his vote would put Eklipse in, plus the whole promising a big post and then never doing it. I still don't want to vote him yet, because I know from experience how an early L1 can be bad, but It's a definite cause for an

FOS:Super Smash Bros. Fan

The problem with this post is the amount of parroting in this post. All your reasons for FoSing have already been said by other people, try giving something else you have that no one else has said.

In your eyes, am I scummy?

No, I find you the least scummy right now (partly a gut feeling).

Is charlie scummy?

If SSB flips town (that is, if we do choose to lynch him) I would find him scummy for jumping on SSB without contributing anything against him.

What makes you think this? Do you know what bussing means?

Rereading, I realize how dumb I sound saying it could be bussing, that seems unlikely. Less unlikely than a Nacho-Charlie scum team. And even that isn't very likely.

In my experience, scum follow good-sounding cases brought fourth by a townie; they're normally too afraid to follow something presented by their scumbuddy so quickly. Do you agree with that?

And yes, I do agree that scum wouldn't normally follow a partner that quickly, especially a SE would not be likely to do that.

If SSBF flips scum, who is his most likely scumbuddy? Why?

Hm, if he flips scum, I could only guess really.

No idea what I was thinking in 104 honestly...

Super:

He's probably spending his free time making another eclipse, let's get him back on the game where he belongs. And he did say he might be a lurker.

ctrl+f does wonderful things. It was in his random vote against eklipse. That makes me really not like eklipse's post, misquoting on purpose. He clearly (at least in my mind) jokingly put a vote on you, to make sure you spend time playing instead of writing books.

Also you say that CT has made good posts with content. But looking at him in iso (that is what it is called eklipse), there is not that much content. He echoed some people, and defended himself when he didn't have to. not much scum hunting going on, or nice juicy posts.

Really good post. Answering all questions thrown at you, giving out good suggestion, and actually challenging me to defend Coach Travis.

Robo, could you answer my question? Thanks in advance. Also, PBPA (Post By Post Analysis) is not as important as your input on what's happening/what's happened in the game thus far, especially everything surrounding the SSBF bandwagon. And if you don't think CT is scum, then who DO you think is scum?

SSBF, I agree with mb50 and his comment on Coach Travis. Could you direct us to some of his solid posting? I've also noticed that the majority of your analysis has been due to activity, with the sole exceptions of Coach Travis and I. Why are we different then the other low-activity members? Also, laziness normally isn't a scumtell. What posts specifically set you off on him, and why?

Look at the bolded. That's the difference between ACTIVE lurking (the scummy kind), and PASSIVE lurking. Active lurking is posting to avoid prods; not offering a whole lot of content, but a whole lot of posts. Sometimes, it's posting something halfway decent every couple of days to just stay out of the radar. Passive lurking is simply not posting; when people lose interest in the game and disappear. Active lurking is scummy, passive lurking is not. And also, just because someone posts a lot doesn't mean that they aren't scum: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... start=1450. Look at the flips and then ISO Ythan for an example of that.

Another great post from you. Lots of details and you actually helped me understand the difference between active and passive lurking.

I'll continue my massive quoting's later, I'll skip to the main part of the post. Who I think is town and who is scummy.

Charlie

Okay, not really liking him much. He lacks contents in some of his posts and failed to explain on his own why he originally voted for me.

Possible Scum read

Coach Travis

Not as good as I thought he was. So far, his posts hasn't really been good and is also guilty of parroting. Looks like mb53 was right.

Possible Scum read

Eklipse

Really wish he would post more. However, most of his posts has been really great. They have lots of contents, he asks question, and so far, other then lack of posting, he's hasn't really posted anything scummy.

Possible Town read

mb53

Keep up the fantastic work. Right now, you're the least scummy of the group. You make excellent posts, posts with lots of contents, make good questions, and never back off from your ground. You also gave very good reasons for your vote and I really do like your two analysis.

Pro-Town read

Matteh

Shown decent amount of activity in the game and has made a few really solid posts. Also gives good reason for voting and his analysis was decent as well.

Possible Town read

Nachomamma8

Best player slighly behind mb53. You ask hard questions, all of your posts have great contents, you go into details for your posts, and helped a lot.

Pro-Town read

Robocopter87

My least favorite player in the group. Early in the game, he was actually doing pretty good, but starting around my first analysis, he took a dive in quality. Failing to admit that I had good reasons to be voted on, delaying on answering questions (I read the thread and Nachomamma8 had to remind him not once, not twice, but three times to answer his questions), rebuttals that I could easily respond to without thinking of stupid reasons, etc. He also complained about bandwagons, while being an hypocrite and voting me. On top of that, making him more scummy is that after like a few rebuttals, he decided to quit on me and gives an poor reason. As of now, you are the scummiest player in the game, so my vote stays.

Scum read

Shadsticle

Another great poster of the group. Most of his posts has a lot of qualities, makes good contents, ask good questions, and is an all-around solid player.

Probable Town read

Basically how I rank all the players:

Pro-Town

:
1. mb53
2. Nachomamma8

Probable Townie

:
3. Shadsticle

Possible Townie

:
4. Eklipse
5. Matteh

Possible Scums

:
6. Charlie
7. Coach Travis

Scum read

:
8. Robocopter87

I know this isn't the best analysis and all and if that's so, I'm sorry. However, this took a long time to do, so I really hope you enjoyed it. Please give out your opinion on the analysis.

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

So what do you know? I made the official 200th post of the group. But then again, this is irrelavent to the game.

Still, it's nice to see that the 200th post is something that took time to do.

[Coach Travis]

Also, why did you vote for Eklipse as an random vote when mb53 already gave an serious vote? I know I did the same thing later, but nevertheless, please elaborate.

Because there still wasn't a ton of serious discussion going on. Honestly, in retrospect that probably wasn't a great idea, but I always like making at least one RV per game, so it was better to use it early on before things really got interesting.

Oh, and EB explained the quoting thing to me shortly after my one post, and in case you never noticed, I've used the occasional quote since then.

As for the analysis: I found it interesting overall, but a lot of what you said is stuff that has been mentioned already, and I don't really feel I learned much new from it:I already found Robo suspicious, and even my own brief analysis came to similar conclusions for who appeared townie, and so far, nothing has changed to make me feel otherwise. And your "parroting" thing on me is ironic, because it's pretty much parroting what mb53 said.

[ElectricBadger]

Vote Count:

With 9 players alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

(1) Super Smash Bros. Fan: Matteh
(1) Coach Travis: mb53
(3) Robocopter: Nachomamma8, Shadsticle, Super Smash Bros. Fan

(4) Not Voting: Coach Travis, Eklipse, Charlie, Robocopter87

Day One ends Midnight PST, April 19th.

[mb53]

Question for Coach Travis, Eklispe, Charlie, and Robo (the non-voters):
Who do you find the most suspicious right now? Why aren't you voting for that person?

[Coach Travis]

I've mentioned it a few times:Robo. However, he already has three votes on him, so another one would put him into L-1, where he could easily be finished off if we're wrong and there's currently no mafia voting him. With that being said, I'm actually fairly close to voting him at this point, as I am getting progressively more suspicious of him.

[Shadsticle]

You're lamenting lack of talk in the thread, but you haven't answered any of the random questions yourself. I'd rather be posting more often too, but if only half the players start doing most(or all) of the talking, Mafia have ample opportunity to hide or, simpler still, just coast to a win.

Incorrect, he already has done that. However, the rest of your statement is very good. I really do like it when people actually contribute to the thread (I despise inactivity).

Where did I do this? If anything I called him out for posting too much (with too little content, having missed the questions in his quote boxes).

No offense, but that post really didn't make any sense. Can you attempt to clarify that?

You see from the first quote I missed the fact Robo had answered the Random Questions in the quote boxes of his first reply. I was explaining in the second quote that I didn't like the fact he was posting so much without actually posting much valuable content - spotting the question answers made him look slightly better in my eyes, but not much.

[Shadsticle]

Also @ mod, could we get a prod on Charlie please.

He's got buckets of stuff to answer, last post was 3 days ago or so.

[ElectricBadger]

Charlie prodded (though he actually wasn't due for one when you asked - I give 3 days before I start the harassment).

[Charlie]

For someone that didn't seem to like the RQS, this seems random as hell, and way out of RQS. What the dealio?

It wasn't random. Nachomamma8 mispelled mb53 as mb530 during the last quote at that point in time. Adding that zero warrants the question.

What in his 174 changed your mind - or was it just the fact he said he wouldn't self-lynch? If the deadline was in five minutes, who would you vote and why? Have you seen anything yet that would suggest to you a potential scumteam?

It was the fact he said he would not lynch himself. But in the situation you pointed out, yes I would vote SSBF. Day 1 no lynch is a bad idea. A potential scumteam...let's see.

Who is ignoring SSBF the most? It would be that person.

@Charlie: Of the eight of us here, who do you find suspicious and why? Try to list two at minimal.

Yourself and Eklipse. You ended up worse in the debate with Robocopter87. Eklipse is lurking/MIA.

No, but I like 0 more than 8.

This is a town tell. Trust me.

My stance? I support a SSBF or an Eklipse lynch today.

Pro-Town:
1. mb53
2. Nachomamma8

See, this is when you people mess around with my mind. His Pro-Town choice matches mine 100%. In that order.

Who do you find the most suspicious right now? Why aren't you voting for that person?

I hope you make it through the night.

Vote: SSBF

Did I miss anything? I apologize if I did, and also if town does not find me very useful. I suppose I could put in more effort to scumhunt, would you rather I do that?

[Shadsticle]

I suppose I could put in more effort to scumhunt, would you rather I do that?

I think the answer to this is fairly obvious, so I kinda hope the question is rhetorical. I'd also kinda like to see a more detailed breakdown of why you suspect SSBF(again). Right now it makes like you look kinda wishy washy, taking your vote off him after his 174(I didn't see any reason to do this really), and putting it back on after being called on it.

[Robocopter87]

Robocopter87
My least favorite player in the group. Early in the game, he was actually doing pretty good, but starting around my first analysis, he took a dive in quality. Failing to admit that I had good reasons to be voted on, delaying on answering questions (I read the thread and Nachomamma8 had to remind him not once, not twice, but three times to answer his questions), rebuttals that I could easily respond to without thinking of stupid reasons, etc. He also complained about bandwagons, while being an hypocrite and voting me. On top of that, making him more scummy is that after like a few rebuttals, he decided to quit on me and gives an poor reason. As of now, you are the scummiest player in the game, so my vote stays.

Scum read

Only scumread! Dude I'm unique in my own special scummy way. [/joke]

Nice post, lots of content. I find that usually the people who think I'm scum are town. But hey, its probably just me.

Also on an unrelated note,

This is wrong.

To use quotes, do {quote="Insert name here}{/quote}, but replace { and } with [ and ]. Hope that helped.

Its,(Post it in seperate post.)

[Robocopter87]

[Robocopter87]

EBWOP: It was wrong because it was missing quotation marks.

[mb53]

Yes robo, I think that everyone has quotes down by now =P
@ Charlie please make a summary of your reasons for voting on Super, it will help us. And yes, scum hunt. You do have a point about Eklipse lurking, he hasn't posted since Thursday =O

[ElectricBadger]

Eklipse prodded.

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

@Charlie: There's a few I do disagree with:

Yourself and Eklipse. You ended up worse in the debate with Robocopter87. Eklipse is lurking/MIA.

I can see why you think lurking is suspicious, but does that alone warrant him being an possible scum? Give other reasons for why he could be scum other then lurking.

See, this is when you people mess around with my mind. His Pro-Town choice matches mine 100%. In that order.

How is this in any form a scumtell? Please do explain. All I see is that you agree with me and that you think I'm messing around with your mind.

And I do have an interesting question: Why do you asks question like you do? Just wondering.

[Charlie]

I can see why you think lurking is suspicious, but does that alone warrant him being an possible scum? Give other reasons for why he could be scum other then lurking.

Would you accept the answer: because of his creepy looking avatar?

How is this in any form a scumtell? Please do explain. All I see is that you agree with me and that you think I'm messing around with your mind.

And I do have an interesting question: Why do you asks question like you do? Just wondering.

It is not a scum tell. It is because it does not occur to me that you-scum (my current vote) would say what you just said i.e. you're not scum. I messes with my mind.

I ask questions to get a read on people. It is a psychology thing. Short explaination: being relaxed and agreeable when answering seemingly pointless questions is a town tell. Want another example of how to apply psychology in online mafia? You are now breathing manually.

@ Charlie please make a summary of your reasons for voting on Super, it will help us. And yes, scum hunt. You do have a point about Eklipse lurking, he hasn't posted since Thursday =O

Reading SSBF with assumption that he is scum from newest to oldest is believable. He "lost" the debate with Robocopter87. (These two are 99% confirmed NOT scum together at this point -- far fetched to believe they would so heatedly argue like that). Possible both are town.

Lurking by itself is a good enough scum-tell. I'll gopher it.

I think the answer to this is fairly obvious, so I kinda hope the question is rhetorical. I'd also kinda like to see a more detailed breakdown of why you suspect SSBF(again). Right now it makes like you look kinda wishy washy, taking your vote off him after his 174(I didn't see any reason to do this really), and putting it back on after being called on it.

This is a town tell too. But wishy washy applies when someone votes and unvotes many people and/or during a short timeframe. I'm not moving my vote unless to prevent a quickhammer thus prematurely ending D1. It are a fact.

Hey, that means I'll really have to do work on SSBF! He only deserves it. But I'm really kinda lazy to work up such heavy thinking power until say...
72 hours time? Should get a good one up by then. If not, then by 24 hours after that. Yep.

People to look at more closely:
1) Coach Travis
2) Robocopter87
3) Eklipse

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

@Charlie: Two things:

1. Is Eklipse's avatar your only other reason for pushing suspicion on him? If so, that pathetic, because that's something for RVS, not when we have a ton of information already. Find another reason for him being an possible scum and please don't let it be something that is RVS material.

2. How did I lose the debate with Robocopter87? He was the one who dropped the charge on me. I still have my vote on him, so their is no way that I could have lost the debate.

I do however, appreciates the response to my other two questions.

[Nachomamma8]

@Super Smash Bros. Fan: There's a point in mafia where you have to determine the difference between finding a person's play scummy and simply disagreeing with it. You seem to me to be the type of person who takes his mafia pretty seriously; Charlie, on the other hand, is less careful and more relaxed. So, he may joke around a lot more than you, but that doesn't mean that it's scummy. If you think that he's deflecting your questions by joking, then keep on questioning him; don't be quick to take everything seriously and label it pathetic.

@Matteh: Has the SSBF/Robocopter8 argument changed your view on their scumminess? Do you still think that they could be scum together? In your eyes, who came out looking better from the argument?

@Coach Travis: I can't help but notice your lack of a vote has helped you avoid taking a strong position on anything. Could you arrange everyone in order of scumminess with a few sentences of reasoning by each so I can see where you stand in this game?

Overall, Coach Travis is starting to rise on my scumlist, and I need content from him, ASAP. Robocopter also needs to offer a bit more content before I'm willing to pull my vote off him.

[mb53]

Has the SSBF/Robocopter8 argument changed your view on their scumminess? Do you still think that they could be scum together? In your eyes, who came out looking better from the argument?

I think that now robo is slightly scummier (I saw some good points against him), and super slightly towner. And when did I ever say that they could be a scum team (to answer, no I couldn't see both of them scum.)?

[Coach Travis]

@Coach Travis: I can't help but notice your lack of a vote has helped you avoid taking a strong position on anything. Could you arrange everyone in order of scumminess with a few sentences of reasoning by each so I can see where you stand in this game.

I really haven't been finding much no one else has already pointed out, even when I've done long read-throughs. But since you asked, I will provide updated impressions on everyone, most scum to least scum:


Robo:I just haven't liked his attitude most of this game, and I don't mean his joking style from earlier, that was fine. What I mean is, throughout the whole game he's seemed like he doesn't really care, his response to Super's case on him in particular just seemed like him saying "you're wrong", without really going into much detail to explain why he feels that way. The fact that he has some experience means I can't just rule him out as a newbie town.

Charlie:I don't know, something about him is still bothering me, even though he has been posting a bit more. I'm not really liking his case on Super,and don't see why he'd say Super lost the debate with Robo, considering more people seem suspicious of Robo at this point.

Matteh:He had his one big post, but I haven't seen much from him since. Nothing about him is really bothering me, but I really don't have much of a read on him either way at this point.

Eklipse:He had some really good posts early on, but has kinda disappeared lately. I won't hold the lurking against him, because as I said, every post he's made has been rather helpful, but I would like to see him return soon.

Super:I did find him suspicious earlier, but he's since revealed himself to pretty much be an excited newbie, which is fine, as he's at least been putting an effort into his case on Robo, and not ruling out that someone else could be mafia.

Shad:I still have a pro-town read on him. He's done some scumhunting, and been helpful overall.

mb53:You know, I can't blame him for being so suspicious of me:I really just don't think I'm cut out for playing mafia(I have a hard time making good reads on players no matter how much I read through, which is the reason for so little content, and that obviously makes me a bad townie). Regardless, he's been one of our most helpful players, so he still gets a strong townie read.

Nacho:I've never suspected him at all to this point, and he's done nothing to make me think otherwise. He's been a very good scum-hunter this game, and has just generally come across as a very helpful townie.

[Robocopter87]

What I mean is, throughout the whole game he's seemed like he doesn't really care, his response to Super's case on him in particular just seemed like him saying "you're wrong", without really going into much detail to explain why he feels that way.

I dont care to a point. I enjoy playing but I won't flip out when I get lynched or when I die or when other people die.

I am extremly bad at explaining things and usually just post the information I got my reasons from. But I get called out for IIoA and my case his thrown to dirt.

Still working on who I think is scum.

[Matteh]

Has the SSBF/Robocopter8 argument changed your view on their scumminess? Do you still think that they could be scum together? In your eyes, who came out looking better from the argument?

I think that now robo is slightly scummier (I saw some good points against him), and super slightly towner. And when did I ever say that they could be a scum team (to answer, no I couldn't see both of them scum.)?

see, when someone puts @matteh, that generally means the question is aimed at me

i typed some stuff up on word last night and was sure i posted it, must have been supertired lol. gimme a few minutes.

[mb53]

Has the SSBF/Robocopter8 argument changed your view on their scumminess? Do you still think that they could be scum together? In your eyes, who came out looking better from the argument?

I think that now robo is slightly scummier (I saw some good points against him), and super slightly towner. And when did I ever say that they could be a scum team (to answer, no I couldn't see both of them scum.)?

see, when someone puts @matteh, that generally means the question is aimed at me

i typed some stuff up on word last night and was sure i posted it, must have been supertired lol. gimme a few minutes.

Sorry, was tired and got confused since Matthew is my real life name