Newbie 1777: Wedding In Vegas! [Game Over]

[UpTooLate]

Vote Count 1.05

[0]MMM -
[0]Firescreamer -
[0]Ingeel -
[0]Epid -
[0]JenLew -
[0]LadyeAeaea -
[1]SensFan - Firescreamer

[L-2]

[3]Srceenplay - JenLew, SensFan, MMM
[0]Drixx -

[5]Not Voting - Ingeel, Epid, LadyeAeaea, Drixx, Srceenplay


With

9

alive it takes

5

to lynch!

Mod Notes - Pagetop! Ingeel replaced Meduna.

Day 1 ends in (expired on 2017-02-27 22:55:55).

[SensFan]

Jesus. This is going to be a long-ass boring game if everyone is this uptight about the mere thought that maybe someone will be lynched.

[FireScreamer]

Jesus. This is going to be a long-ass boring game if everyone is this uptight about the mere thought that maybe someone will be lynched.

Someone will be lynched. Every day. But the idea that you'd not wait a couple of days in order to give someone a chance to claim or to make a final case is absurd. This isn't a speedrun. Anyway, likely we will just play around you now so this has turned into a non issue. While peoples reactions to the concept may still be relevant I don't think arguing the core concept is going to catch scum.

[SensFan]

Arguing about the concept isn't relevant. The idea that you're using my philosophy to justify a paradigm where people can be even *more* likely to avoid placing a vote they don't want to is very much worth discussing, though. And it's not like you can realistically have people act like they're at L-1 just because they're at L-2 and the Sens boogeyman is out there and might maybe potentially hammer them.

[FireScreamer]

Arguing about the concept isn't relevant. The idea that you're using my philosophy to justify a paradigm where people can be even *more* likely to avoid placing a vote they don't want to is very much worth discussing, though. And it's not like you can realistically have people act like they're at L-1 just because they're at L-2 and the Sens boogeyman is out there and might maybe potentially hammer them.

You made this world. I am just trying to live in it. We can still effectively pressure people. Also if people disagree with my workaround i'm more than happy to argue that. I do feel that this is going to be a needless distraction however but I suppose there isn't a a way around that now as long as you maintain your stance.

[SensFan]

How about this for a bold plan: You play Mafia the way it's always been played, voting people you think are Scum, asking for them to claim at L-1 if you like, etc. That simple.

None of this "Oh well I want to vote for X but really if you think about it he's at L-2 which kinda sorta maybe counts as L-1 so instead I'll keep pressuring the wagon while conveniently just giving notice of intent to vote instead of actually voting and committing to this since I don't want to look bad when he flips X."

[FireScreamer]

How about this for a bold plan: You play Mafia the way it's always been played, voting people you think are Scum, asking for them to claim at L-1 if you like, etc. That simple.

None of this "Oh well I want to vote for X but really if you think about it he's at L-2 which kinda sorta maybe counts as L-1 so instead I'll keep pressuring the wagon while conveniently just giving notice of intent to vote instead of actually voting and committing to this since I don't want to look bad when he flips X."

You act like we can't tell where someone stands on a person just because their vote isn't on them. Did you think that when I posted my intent to hammer Screenplay at an exact point in the future unless something changed my mind that I was maybe not being committal?

[Ingeel]

Arguing about the concept isn't relevant. The idea that you're using my philosophy to justify a paradigm where people can be even *more* likely to avoid placing a vote they don't want to is very much worth discussing, though. And it's not like you can realistically have people act like they're at L-1 just because they're at L-2 and the Sens boogeyman is out there and might maybe potentially hammer them.

This response is disgusting. This isn't a fast-paced game. You take your time, analyze your associates and go from there.


I'd be willing to lynch Sens of Drixx today, and for now VOTE: SensFan

[SensFan]

Uh, excuse me? Can you re-word that in a way that at least mildly pretends to respond to something I said?

I'm very familiar with the pace of play, thank you very much. I find the current meta of 3-week deadlines much slower than I would prefer, and have been around for over a decade on this site.

[SensFan]

Uh, excuse me? Can you re-word that in a way that at least mildly pretends to respond to something I said?

I'm very familiar with the pace of play, thank you very much. I find the current meta of 3-week deadlines much

slower

faster than I would prefer, and have been around for over a decade on this site.

Fixing a typo.

[Srceenplay]

To much time has been spent on this. It is not right and it is wrong. It goes against good play style and meta. It's ok if you want to play that way, try it out , test it whatever. It should not be done in a newbie game, go try it in a normal game.

If that's the way they choose to play fine. As a group we can work around that play style.
It seems they are arguing a play style. Play style can be nai.
Move on until something scumy happens.

[Srceenplay]

I will gather some thoughts tomorrow around this time, hopefully. Maybe make a case for another vote. A long day at work and busy tonight. I'm to tired to dig into ISO's right now.

[Ingeel]

Uh, excuse me? Can you re-word that in a way that at least mildly pretends to respond to something I said?

I'm very familiar with the pace of play, thank you very much. I find the current meta of 3-week deadlines much slower than I would prefer, and have been around for over a decade on this site.

In this post

Jesus. This is going to be a long-ass boring game if everyone is this uptight about the mere thought that maybe someone will be lynched.

It might be me being a complete doofus, but it seems to imply that you want days to go fast. I correlate that with quickhammering, and quickhammering an obvious VI is bad

[SensFan]

I have no qualms with long days. I just have no patience for a game where people are *announcing an intent to place an L-1 vote*. That's insane to the point of absurdity, and will only serve to allow people to appear to support a wagon while buying time to find a reason not to.

[JenLew]

That is wrong and bad play. Votes are not only for killing they are for information gathering. That is wrong of you to try and say otherwise.

Interesting turn in play style.

That is a perfect way to stall the day out if you try to demonized people's vote power. Votes are a tool not a death note.

Not sure what to make of this tbh but a valid point.

How about this for a bold plan: You play Mafia the way it's always been played, voting people you think are Scum, asking for them to claim at L-1 if you like, etc. That simple.

None of this "Oh well I want to vote for X but really if you think about it he's at L-2 which kinda sorta maybe counts as L-1 so instead I'll keep pressuring the wagon while conveniently just giving notice of intent to vote instead of actually voting and committing to this since I don't want to look bad when he flips X."

I agree with this.

Uh, excuse me? Can you re-word that in a way that at least mildly pretends to respond to something I said?

I'm very familiar with the pace of play, thank you very much. I find the current meta of 3-week deadlines much slower than I would prefer, and have been around for over a decade on this site.

In this post

Jesus. This is going to be a long-ass boring game if everyone is this uptight about the mere thought that maybe someone will be lynched.

It might be me being a complete doofus, but it seems to imply that you want days to go fast. I correlate that with quickhammering, and quickhammering an obvious VI is bad

I like the new insights we're getting. Makes me see some thing in another light.

I have no qualms with long days. I just have no patience for a game where people are *announcing an intent to place an L-1 vote*. That's insane to the point of absurdity, and will only serve to allow people to appear to support a wagon while buying time to find a reason not to.

I agree with this. Why vote if you don't want X to be lynched. Either you're with the wagon or against it. If you're not sure (or at least as sure as you possibly can be without any proof) don't vote.

In my opinion don't go along with a train of thought just because everyone else is. It's ok for opinions to differ that's what makes this game interesting. I voted for srceenplay because that's what felt right the way I read his posts. If you didn't agree with that then why vote for him and then be afraid that someone's going to hammer. This makes no sense to me, but to be fair some things that Ingeel are saying are making some sense, almost too much, which is kind of confusing me at this stage.

[Srceenplay]

That is wrong and bad play. Votes are not only for killing they are for information gathering. That is wrong of you to try and say otherwise.

Interesting turn in play style.

That is a perfect way to stall the day out if you try to demonized people's vote power. Votes are a tool not a death note.

Not sure what to make of this tbh but a valid point.

How about this for a bold plan: You play Mafia the way it's always been played, voting people you think are Scum, asking for them to claim at L-1 if you like, etc. That simple.

None of this "Oh well I want to vote for X but really if you think about it he's at L-2 which kinda sorta maybe counts as L-1 so instead I'll keep pressuring the wagon while conveniently just giving notice of intent to vote instead of actually voting and committing to this since I don't want to look bad when he flips X."

I agree with this.

Uh, excuse me? Can you re-word that in a way that at least mildly pretends to respond to something I said?

I'm very familiar with the pace of play, thank you very much. I find the current meta of 3-week deadlines much slower than I would prefer, and have been around for over a decade on this site.

In this post

Jesus. This is going to be a long-ass boring game if everyone is this uptight about the mere thought that maybe someone will be lynched.

It might be me being a complete doofus, but it seems to imply that you want days to go fast. I correlate that with quickhammering, and quickhammering an obvious VI is bad

I like the new insights we're getting. Makes me see some thing in another light.

I have no qualms with long days. I just have no patience for a game where people are *announcing an intent to place an L-1 vote*. That's insane to the point of absurdity, and will only serve to allow people to appear to support a wagon while buying time to find a reason not to.

I agree with this. Why vote if you don't want X to be lynched. Either you're with the wagon or against it. If you're not sure (or at least as sure as you possibly can be without any proof) don't vote.

In my opinion don't go along with a train of thought just because everyone else is. It's ok for opinions to differ that's what makes this game interesting. I voted for srceenplay because that's what felt right the way I read his posts. If you didn't agree with that then why vote for him and then be afraid that someone's going to hammer. This makes no sense to me, but to be fair some things that Ingeel are saying are making some sense, almost too much, which is kind of confusing me at this stage.

1-why is the turn in play style interesting to you?
2-how can you not know what to make of it but still have it be a valid point?
3-why do you agree with it? Do you think votes are death sentences that should be taken away? People are not allowed to change their decisions or have new reads? Can they if someone hammers without giving them time to reevaluate?
4-What are you seeing in a new light?
5-Why is ingeel confusing?

[Ingeel]

I have no qualms with long days. I just have no patience for a game where people are *announcing an intent to place an L-1 vote*. That's insane to the point of absurdity, and will only serve to allow people to appear to support a wagon while buying time to find a reason not to.

mk

UNVOTE: SensFan

I'm keeping my eye on you.

In my opinion don't go along with a train of thought just because everyone else is. It's ok for opinions to differ that's what makes this game interesting. I voted for srceenplay because that's what felt right the way I read his posts. If you didn't agree with that then why vote for him and then be afraid that someone's going to hammer. This makes no sense to me, but to be fair some things that Ingeel are saying are making some sense, almost too much, which is kind of confusing me at this stage.

I too like casting shade.

[MMM]

UNVOTE: Srceenplay
I have a bunch of stuff to address it seems, I'll try not to miss anything

[MMM]

Hold on if one more person votes Srceenplay he gets lynched?! Isn't this reckless??

This is why the intent to hammer "rule" exists.

Unvote

because we have a wildcard of a not picked up role PM and an incoming replacement. That's just ... not a good idea.

In general, you don't want to leave a situation where someone can come in and hammer without realizing it or pretend to hammer without realizing it. This can lead to all sorts of problems, because you simply cannot know if they knew or didn't know and if it happens to be that they did it without realizing and it's a mislynch instead of a scum lynch, it can lead to back to back mislynches which, in the newbie game, puts the game into LYLO most of the time.

I need to read through again, but I don't feel quite as negative towards Srceenplay as I did last night. I see some actual effort to explain. I'm going to respond to a bunch of quotes and point out what the problem was from my POV though. I want to stress this for the newer players: you should not just post your conclusion and assume everyone understands how you got there. If I posit Srceenplay as town, then it appears like he just posted conclusions and expected the rest of us to immediately understand how he got there. The problem is... once he finally explained, I didn't at all see it and so up until that point, it appeared to me that he was literally and intentionally just trolling us for laughs, which is something that bothers me in newbie games. It's hard enough to learn how to play this game without someone intentionally screwing with you, ya know?

The improved explanations are what I wanted from him, and since I got them now I unvoted him in my previous post.

Your threats are not appropriate. I feel like you are mad/angry that is who I'm voting.

Stop angle shooting. It's against the rules.

Furthermore, I take the newbie queue seriously, and if you're just here to troll, believe me I will go to the mat to ensure you don't continue to have the opportunity to do so.

As far as I can see, you have two options now:

1.) Play the game and answer the question SEVERAL of us have now asked you, and which you continue to dodge. Stop trolling. Stop trying to angle shoot.

OR

2.) Keep screwing with a newbie game and see what happens.

I think everyone would prefer you stopped with the trolling and antics. Seriously. We're well beyond reasonable territory here now.

Angle shooting? Against the rules?
If there are rules you as ic have a responsibility to explain and show them to us. Don't state facts without explaining that is misleading and something scum does.

I am taking this seriously as well. There is not just one play style anyone will see playing so there is no reason for someone not to see it now.

Stop saying there are only two options. That is untrue. There are many things people can do or choose. I will not conform to your will and do what you want. Don't imply in newbie games that is what you are supposed to do under pressure.

Show me the troll posts please.

Angle Shooting is accusing someone of breaking the rules (your repeated referring to my posts as threats) in an attempt to bait the game moderator into stepping in and punishing the player. It is seriously frowned upon because mod censure should only happen as an absolute last resort. Therefore, attempting to influence the mod to take action against another player to further your win condition is considered against the rules and colloquially referred to as "angle shooting".

As for showing your troll posts, I could have just quoted most of your ISO before this post, because we kept asking you to explain the reasons you were scum reading Lady, and you kept just asserting that had done so, when you had not.

The fact that MMM saw what might be viewed either as newbie confusion OR as cognitive dissonance in post #24 wasn't enough for me to put the dots together, and I'm pretty good at this game.

I went and read that post a few times trying to figure out what on earth made you slingshot from pushing a no lynch to being certain Lady was scum, and I couldn't see anything in that post that was anywhere

NEAR

enough to be so sure. And you simply refused to give your thought process or any kind of logical reasoning or ... anything.

Trolling is only NAI until it starts harming the game, and you were harming the game with that long string of refusing to explain.

I would have explained if that was my argument, but imo it's not up to me to explain other peoples' actions which is at least part of the reason I voted him. I admit to hypocrisy here because I have a tendency of not giving good explanations either though <.<

Actually one small request, don't hammer before everyone *COUGH* Meduna has at least posted once.

This is very good advice.

I'm a little wary of MMM right now. There's a little bit of a touch of opportunism in the stances. First going along with Srceenplay on a posited Lady+me scum pairing, based upon almost nothing, and then putting out posts claiming to fear being mislynched when Srceenplay flips scum, and then going for easy town credit here.

What did you say your prior experience with mafia was again MMM?

My prior experience is on Pokemonshowdown Mafia, which is IRC-style/live. If you ask me the quality of games (going by players' day actions) there is low most of the time though. Normally players just memorize buzzwords and try to associate other players' actions to their scumplay even though most of the time these are NAI.
Also I don't know if you noticed but I didn't go along with it at all, I said it was unlikely and I didn't lynch her for reasons [I assume?] are valid.

Well I did.
Plus she posted since and ignored my vote and fact that I called her scum.

I assume given we have two weeks and you didn't give any reason as to why you scum read me, that you'd either eventually do that or you were throwing out a random vote. If you have any questions about what I've said so far I'm happy to answer them. But I don't really care, or want to waste my time defending against nothing. Or maybe I missed something and you can enlighten me on that.

In terms of my post regarding the person that gives as advice - I was inquiring as to why they're in the game rather than having a player who doesn't have a role fill this part. Like, very easy to look townie when you're providing useful information imo. Does that make sense? If you can explain your read on me since apparently it's a serious one, I think that'll be a good step. If you *are* just trolling, I hope we can at least get good reactions out of this. If you are scum then lol - although I'm not really sure about you being scum because of this behaviour as I think it'd be rather reckless of you to not only advocate for NL but also tunnel blindly right off the bat (or maybe you're a noob who's never played mafia :p). I think we should definitely be looking at people jumping on you for these actions for an easy mis-lynch.

I don't have much time today but I'll be way more active tomorrow when I'm sitting in the library studying all day (yawn).

This is the somehow elusive for everyone post.

Also what exactly is a SE? And isn't there a direct incentive to not lynch the IC because they're useful - or can the IC still give us info if they're dead?

In this post you ask a question about not knowing what a SE is. Then you move to knowing IC is important and imply that it would be best not to lynch. After that to finish the post it looked to me that you were asking if you can still talk to IC after they are dead.

This is where you finally post what made you go from "we should no lynch" to "I'm certain she is scum" and I get what you're getting at finally, and if I had not made the IC post that I did, I would actually agree with you. Post 24 appears to have cognitive dissonance. First she asks what an SE is, then she asks about an incentive not to lynch the IC ... so there's a bit of a experience dissonance there, especially with the end of the question asking if I can communicate after dead. But ... take into account my IC post and it feels genuine newbie question through and through.

Agree?

Personally agree. That is what I felt when I read her post as well and why I said it was unlikely that she was scum solely based on that.

I agree, I would like to hear more of me too.
I would also like to hear what Meduna's replacement thoughts on this are, in the meant time, my thoughts are this:
Srceenplay will most likely get lynched in the end for his trolling and avoiding questions. I think he's either an unhelpful townie or a inexperienced scum. Most likely the first. He is getting lynched for the fact that he is trolling and no other reason. I am debating with myself whether or not this is a good or bad choice, but we need to get the game started somehow. I'll get back to you on that later, sorry for not posting very often.

Based on recent happenings I agree that Srceenplay is most likely town but I FOS Epid for simply repeating the conclusions everyone else already came to.

Nobody is going to quickhammer. It would only bring huge amount of pressure on them day 2 if he flips town. A townie has no incentive to bring that much pressure onto the only person they know isnt scum. I've posted an intent to hammer in around 43 hours. I'd like to hear more from Epid and the eventual replacement of Med before I do so though. So that may be extended.

Had I not been on the wagon, I'd 100% have hammered him if he were at L-1. If you're not comfortable with a lynch of someone, your vote shouldn't be on them.

There are more reasons for wanting to put someone at L-1 than simply outright lynching them. I agree with Firescreamer's L-2 thing.

[Epid]

Sorry, I'm not finding time to fit mafia in at the moment.

@mod, could you replace me?

[MMM]

I suppose that makes my point on him moot.

[Srceenplay]

Why would you say that?

[MMM]

If he has so little time he actually needs to replace out of the game that explains the limited amount of original input from his part.

[Srceenplay]

The game has been going on for six days. Do you know if he has always not had time? Something just come up and now no time?

I'm not going to disregard their posts just because the replaced out.

[MMM]

Actually ignore what I just said, I thought he stated before he didn't have a lot of time for this but upon re-reading his ISO it doesn't look like it.