Newbie 1761: Welcome to Mafia (Game Over)

[Equinox]

Vote Count 1.04

Clemency (1) - algebra
karldilkington (1) - Cheetory6
MortFeld (1) - XnadrojX
XnadrojX (1) - MortFeld
Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez (1) - Deimos27

Not Voting (4) - ArcAngel9, karldilkington, Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez, Clemency

With 9 votes in play, it will take 5 to lynch.

The deadline is Tuesday, December 13, 2016, at 9:00 PM EST (UTC-5), which is in (expired on 2016-12-13 21:00:00).

Moderator Comments

ArcAngel9 is on V/LA from December 2 to December 8.

[Clemency]

I'd say it's about 2-3 days before I get a decent computer to use. I'll do my best off mobile though.

[Cheetory6]

I expect a sexy catchup from you then.
Otherwise I'm gonna be all like
*wag wag wag* with my finger at you while saying "tut tut".

[Clemency]

I really like this person can I keep him?

[MortFeld]

It's possible I could have misread, but this is where I got the idea that he scumread Zaraki to some extent.

It seems more likely to me that he was trying to make a vote that he felt was doing something.
Whether that means that he's scum trying to pretend to be useful or town actually trying to be useful is kind of up in the air, but I think the general idea of him trying to have his cake and eat it too as scum just seems less likely to me than him just trying to get the ball rolling one way or the other.
If that makes sense?

To be clear, I never said Xnadro definitely scumread Zaraki - I just said that if Zaraki's reasoning was part of Xnadro's justification for his vote, Xnadro must be scumreading Zaraki for his reasoning. Xnadro has been wildly inconsistent as to whether or not Zaraki's reasoning was part of the justification for Xnadro's vote.

The reason I'm struggling with this is that Xnadro continues to deny that having his cake and eating it too is what he was doing, in writing if not in his head. Instead, he shouts the word random and tells me that I read everything wrong. Yes, he might be stubborn town. But he also OMGUS voted me over the discussion. It's actually not just OMGUS, he's saying "you voted me over something I didn't do, you must be scum" when he clearly did what I accused him of. I feel like earnest town would have realized that something was amiss and reassessed their own play.

[ArcAngel9]

Hey mort, Before I catch up. What's is interesting in this game?

[MortFeld]

On mobile for a few hours. my discussion with xnadro, deimos' zaraki vote, and karl's posts are some of the things I'm thinking about atm. You could check out zaraki weird inconsistency but I'm pretty sure he's just newb.

[Deimos27]

Can you try and maybe put this "ping" into words?

For one reason or another, what was said "pinged' my intuition.

Maybe the tone felt off, maybe the wording was weird. In any case, it generally means a gut scumlean.

[algebra]

Already found scum, thought this game would be harder.
VOTE: Cheetory

[algebra]

I wouldn't be surprised if the partner is in {Clemency, ArcAngel} either.

[Cheetory6]

[algebra]

Want to actually do something or just float around doing shit?

[Cheetory6]

I think maybe I should just float around doing shit.
It's all I'm good at, really.

[Cheetory6]

[karldilkington]

OK, a few things to say!

Mort 76: 27 isn't the only post where Xnadroj follows that line of logic (random primary, motive secondary.) Posts 41, 42, 44, I could go on.
I'm poorly wording myself with the phrase "gambit." My point is that in post 29, by placing a "random" vote which wasn't actually random, he prematurely took us out of RVS and started shifting blame to others very quickly. Now if that is a scum move, that is godawful as it puts you straight in the spotlight, especially if your subsequent reasoning for it isn't strong. For that reason, I don't see him as a scumread.

Mort 77: So I am suspicious because I'm both buddying up to Cheetory and I'm unreasonably having a go at Cheetory?!? Taken as a whole I don't really see how the tone of that post was off. You're definitely right that 18 sticks out like a sore scummy thumb though.

Mort 78:
That's fair. My questions to Zaraki are:
1: Why cling to your vote for so long?
2: You clearly didn't care too much for your own line of reasoning concerning RVS if you were willing to drop it so fast. Why not carry on arguing for it if you thought it was important? Why did you argue for so long if you didn't think it was important?

Cheetory 99:
My scumread on Zaraki is twofold. First, as everyone agrees, he held his vote on Deimos for way too long. Secondly, and yes this is partly gut, but the speed of his backtrack hardly screams town. Surely a town who has debated the game theory for so long would be more obstinate about the whole thing. Zaraki hasn't even gone for a "fine, I'll unvote but fuck you" kind of approach, he's just tried to move himself out of suspicion as quickly as possible. Where's that Townie emotion? If I can quote the wiki:

Look for that frustration. Look for that resistance, that fight. It's often the distinguishing factor between a player knowing a player's town and not caring about the lynch (scum) and "knowing" a player's town and fighting to prove it (town).

Deimos 86: Right, I seem to have generated some controversy with that statement. I just thought it was suspicious that Cheetory isn't going to share his town reads and I can't think of any valid reasons for doing so. I thought particularly weird for him to actively announce that he's withholding townreads. Then again, he's a more experienced player than me and no one else seems bothered by it. I'm willing to believe that he's got some trick up his sleeve, but if he can't justify withholding his information adequately further on down the line, I'm ready to throw some shade his way.
As for withholding my vote despite my reasoning, I don't see why it's unreasonable. I haven't voted yet because I missed RVS and I feel waiting for Zaraki to offer a justification is worth it. If his justification is good then we should discuss it further, if it's not then it's the last piece of the puzzle. You're probably right that I've got enough to go on to make my vote right now, but now you've called me out on it, I don't know if doing that will make me look more suspicious or not! I best just stick to my reasoning for now.

[karldilkington]

Already found scum, thought this game would be harder.
VOTE: Cheetory

Ok, so it isn't just me then!

[algebra]

Jesus I thought ICs were supposed to be a role model of a good player not a troll. I'm not going to allow Cheetory living through D1.

[Cheetory6]

There's a difference between trolling and not taking someone seriously who's being a jackass who hasn't actually levied anything of consequence at me.
If you want a constructive dialogue with me, I'm waiting.
But if you want to throw abstract criticism like "he hasn't done shit" when really it's either that you're not understanding how I play the game or you're trying to take advantage of how I play the game in general, then I don't have anything of substance to say to you.

[algebra]

Cheetory, who do you think is mafia?

[Cheetory6]

To some extent I was leaning karl for a bit.
I'm holding back on my gut being upset with you atm.

[MortFeld]

I wouldn't be surprised if the partner is in {Clemency, ArcAngel} either.

Scumhunting by association already?

Looking forward to seeing your actual case on Cheetory.

[MortFeld]

Mort 76: 27 isn't the only post where Xnadroj follows that line of logic (random primary, motive secondary.) Posts 41, 42, 44, I could go on.
I'm poorly wording myself with the phrase "gambit." My point is that in post 29, by placing a "random" vote which wasn't actually random, he prematurely took us out of RVS and started shifting blame to others very quickly. Now if that is a scum move, that is godawful as it puts you straight in the spotlight, especially if your subsequent reasoning for it isn't strong. For that reason, I don't see him as a scumread.

Cool, I'm convinced. Xnadroj's inconsistency is NAI. It's not why I'm still voting him.

Mort 77: So I am suspicious because I'm both buddying up to Cheetory and I'm unreasonably having a go at Cheetory?!? Taken as a whole I don't really see how the tone of that post was off. You're definitely right that 18 sticks out like a sore scummy thumb though.

Hm? Your post was off for buddying and it was off for unreasonable aggressiveness. This isn't like acid/base reactions - they don't magically cancel each other out. I didn't say I was suspicious of you for that post, I just said it was off. That's true even if you're hot and cold on the same person. I can make a post saying "SCREW YOU X PERSON" and in the same post say "X Person, everything you say is so right!" and that post is certainly still off in tone.

[algebra]

What makes you think I'm hunting by association? I never said that I was.

[MortFeld]

What makes you think I'm hunting by association? I never said that I was.

I suppose you're right. I guess what I really mean to say is that I don't see the point in discussing potential partners at the time you did. You have not rationally explained your scumread of Cheetory and one of the people you see as a potential partner has barely posted anything and has had no interactions with Cheeto.

Why Clem and Arc?

[algebra]

If everyone else is town, then they must be scum.