Code Geass Mafia: OVAH

[#HBC | marshy]

vote count
blue yoshi (1) - blue yoshi
adumbrodeus (2) - frozenflame751, gheb_01
-rei- (2) - sephiroths masamune, vult redux
sworddancer. (1) - -rei-
gustave (2) - summonerau, xonar
gheb_01 (1) - adumbrodeus
vult redux (1) - overswarm

not voting (5) - sworddancer., kevinm, dark_ermac, meta-kirby, gustave

deadline is last second of 5/23 est
with 15 alive it takes 8 to lynch

 

[Dark_Ermac]

Cool story, bro.

What do you think about me, Dark Ermac? I've given more than enough information to at least make everyone think about my alignment for a moment.

I pick up a strong negative, due to having read your post in the General Discussion Thread. Don't mind me and my bias, for it will eventually pass.

 

[Overswarm]

Admittedly, they also lose because they overanalyze something instead of comparing it to further actions to decide whether or not they were just dumb.

Rushing for a quick lynch because someone did something blatantly scummy, but them turning up town, is no better for town than a slow deliberate lynch on someone innocent. Just keep current actions in mind and then focus on building a wagon on them later in the Day if there is no one else.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Adumbrodeus

1. What are your thoughts on Rei?

Rei's waffling shows either a desire to go the absolute safest route by pressuring the town's "acceptable" person, or an inability to stand up to pressure in regards to a vote, it's either scummy or shows that the person is useless, not sure which yet. In think I made this point of view clear before, and I have a long memory. I also dislike that Rei has posted very little to try to defend his/her actions.


Gheb is just more of a concern right now, if he doesn't give some reasonable material, I'm tossing him into my "very scummy, for future lynch" category and moving on to Rei, definitely by the end of the day.

After that, Rei is up next, then I go for inactives.

 

[Overswarm]

Why are you concerned about what someone thinks of you this early in the game?

I'm not. It's a direct question that can get an obvious and clear answer and I can see how he supports it.

You ever had a talk with your girlfriend and suddenly she's talking waaaaaaay different than normal and you realize she's upset? Same thing, except replace 'upset' with 'mafia' and 'girlfriend' with 'guy on a forum'. Also "she's" with "he's" if need be.

Anything that gets inactives to post is good by me.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

I don't think I'm going to get any info/ support on Rei until he posts again, This does not mean I change my mind about him.

Gheb, You tried to push for a quick lynch on D1 and before everyone had a chance to post.

Unvote,

Vote: Gheb

I would like to hear from you concerning this.

 

[M.K]

@Overswarm, I was viewing on my phone during class this morning. Was in the middle of writing a short post before my teacher decides to own me with her forehead and tell me to put my phone away >_>
Just stopping at home before practice, will be back later with analysis of today's activities.

OS don't break the game before I get back .

 

[Overswarm]

If people give me a way to break it, I will shatter it to pieces 100% of the time.

That said, I can't find the way to break it but have a few logic traps I want to try if people start posting. Specifically Gheb at the moment.

I'm also interested in what rei's final vote choice for today will be.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Admittedly, they also lose because they overanalyze something instead of comparing it to further actions to decide whether or not they were just dumb.

Rushing for a quick lynch because someone did something blatantly scummy, but them turning up town, is no better for town than a slow deliberate lynch on someone innocent. Just keep current actions in mind and then focus on building a wagon on them later in the Day if there is no one else.

Depends, if it's for being useless/inactive then yes.

If it's a lynch for being directly scummy, then the longer the build-up, the more information you have on the players involved.


If it's actually scum, then a longer build-up means that their attempts to protect themselves (or their friends attempts to bus them) reveal more, hence why it's not uncommon to see scum self-hammer to protect other scum.



Furthermore, there's also the rest of the day of scum-hunting to do, other bandwagons can happen during the lead-up to the lynch, it's impossible for town to be active (and therefore gain information) during night, unless they're in masonries with night-communication (which I believe most have).

 

[Dark_Ermac]

I don't think I'm going to get any info/ support on Rei until he posts again, This does not mean I change my mind about him.

Gheb, You tried to push for a quick lynch on D1 and before everyone had a chance to post.

Unvote,

Vote: Gheb

I would like to hear from you concerning this.

Was that during or after RVS?

 

[#HBC | FrozeηFlame]

User Name Posts 
Sephiroths Masamune  45 
Vult Redux  38 
adumbrodeus  28 
Overswarm  23 
Gustave  20 
-Rei-  13 
Gheb_01  9 
SummonerAU  8 
frozenflame751  8 
[B](｡◕‿‿◕｡)  5 [/B]
Dark_Ermac  4 
Blue Yoshi  4 
Sworddancer.  3 
Meta-Kirby  3 
Xonar  2 
KevinM  2 
Marshy  2

Anyone below the moderator on that list is going to be considered a detriment to the town late game. If I don't get a strong scum read, I'm going to try to wagon one of the players there. Just saying this in advance so people know to post. You shouldn't have posts below the moderator; even "useless" posts are more useful than this because then at least we know you're stallling or useless rather than inactive.

Why you keep focusing on activity as a reason to lynch people THIS early in the game, when YOU yourself said that the game has barely been open for 24 hours and we should give people a chance to actually post, is absolutely beyond me. You call for people to scum hunt, yet you activity DO NOT scum hunt by focusing so much on setting your own personal standards for activity and acting like everyone should abide by them. Furthermore, you go and say that we shouldn't hold KevinM culpable for inactivity, but everyone else who hasn't posted how ever much you say is "useless" and should be wagoned. What is it with you BBR's and your double standards?

Vurt / Frozen Flame

1. You two are now confirmed neighbors. Don't give names or numbers, but are there MORE in your neighborhood or are you alone?

2. Vurt, why did you announce FFlame was a Neighbor?

3. Vurt, why did you put suspicion on FFlame so early on? Paraphrase discussions in the neighborhood if need be, but I'm more concerned with your overall intentions than the steps leading to them at the moment.

4. Flame, why do you think Vurt brought suspicion on you before your first post?

1.) I will not answer that question and NEITHER SHOULD VULT because it is blatant information fishing. We already both know the Vult was dumb for even claiming that in the first place, so why in god's name are you now asking him to pour salt on the wound?

2.) Can't answer this but I have a pretty good idea of why he did it and I don't think it is particularly important. It has to do with pre-game discussion we had in our neighborhood and a statement I made without being able to follow up because we can't post there during the day phase.

3.) See 2.

4.) See 2.

Don't we have a rule against doing **** like this? Like attempts to break the game using non-mafia metadata? Play mafia dude and actually scumhunt instead of trying to catch people PMing each other and other resources OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THE GAME to indict people. This is equivalent to kicking someone in the shins to beat them in a game of smash because you're employing resources outside of the scope of the game in order to try to win. Even if you don't agree with that, it's still hardcore against the spirit of the game.

Other games of his I've read as well as TMNT mafia where we played together (he was town, I was scum), he was incredibly patient and had a set pattern to his accusations. In this game, he deviates from this strongly. Regardless of how big a scum tell you consider Adumbrodeus' actions, the Gheb I've seen wouldn't have called him out so strongly in this way. I find it interesting. This isn't necessarily a scum tell in the slightest, but does require closer observation. I myself change my playstyle every game I play so I can't effectively be meta'd, but I have no seen this behavior from Gheb prior to this game.

I've played in way more games with Gheb than you have and I'm telling you that you have a horribly flawed meta and I would encourage you to stop trying to meta people like that because it is an AWFUL way to scum hunt. Seriously, go read newbie 3.

If you think you're unique in that you change your playstyle from game to game, new flash, any mafia player worth his salt either has a.) a very consistent playstyle in all their games regardless of alignment or b.) highly variant playstyles that change from game to game regardless of alignment. If you didn't pick up on it, the key here is "regardless of alignment." Basically what I'm trying to tell you, is trying to meta experience players is the scrubbiest excuse for scum hunting of all time because it DOESN'T WORK and even if a person you do attempt to meta does end up being scum, you can basically chalk that up to luck because saying "I told you so" doesn't exactly fly in mafia.

Basically, Gheb has been both patient AND aggressive in plenty of games as both town and maf. This meta attack is just plain bad.

This carries over to your whole defense of adum, because the fact that he said a very noncontroversial line to most people (i.e. activity is pro town) in two games, one of which he was town, doesn't mean **** in this game. Easily agreeable statements like that are things that good scum will say ALL THE TIME PRECISELY BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WILL GOBBLE IT UP AND ASSUME "OMG HE WAS TOWN AND HE SAID THAT BEFORE, HE SAID IT NOW SO HE'S POLLY TOWN DURRRR". Any scumbag can say stuff like that without significantly working against his goal as a scumbag, and just score tons of townie point from people who only LOOK AT CONTENT, not INTENT like you are.

*looks back at DBZ mafia*

Tell that to them, I was L-1 and just went inactive for a day and someone else got lynched. Dropping cases is never good for town; squeeze as much blood as you can from that stone

Yeah, you "squeeze as much blood" as you can from STRONG accusations and cases, but you don't just latch incessantly on to a case because you assume that switching topics banishes old cases into the twisting nether forever. Your one example is not the rule, and I know for a fact that is it VERY easy to switch topics of discussion, see how they play out, and ultimate return to a previous topic. Taking this fundamentalist "all or nothing" stance is really problematic and restrictive.

Ah, but you're missing the point, inherently activity is more pro-town then inactivity, and while there are bad ways to be active, those serve an easy purpose of telling town who needs to be removed before lylo (or ignored, if it's impossible) or who is themselves scum.

Town can use it wrong, but activity is always an asset to town.

You and overswarm both pitch this line of argument with the assumption that the town will always catch "bad" activity. Bad assumption, and that's why being active is not INHERENTLY pro-town. It is generally protown, but it is not inherently so. How else would scum win games? If your logic was true, town would win every game because the scum would be active and the town would always ultimately weed out the bad activity and lynch all the scum. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Scum win all the time, and thus, activity absolutely CANNOT be inherently pro-town.

Tunneling is picking out a player and taking everything they do whether pro-town or anti-town as scummy.

You have massive tunnel vision atm.

If that's how you define tunnel vision, then I DO NOT have tunnel vision. When have I tried to make everything you've said look like a scum tell? I haven't. I don't think you positing this strange definition is a scum tell. I'm simply addressing a lot of what you say either because its scummy or highly debatable or just poorly informed. When I think something is actually SCUMMY I've SAID THAT in my responses.

Here's the thing, we don't know which is which for sure until the flip, since scum can easily pretend to be dumb town, it depends on the player.

At this point, I'm not sure which VR is, so he's/she's on the list.

Yeah but they have to **** up first to be considered "dumb or scum" so even if a scum tries to "pretend" to be dumb town, they're being scrutinized anyway and its up to the town to discern the deceptive intent of post pleading "dumbness". If the scum succeed at tricking the town, well, then that's good for them because that's their entire JOB in the game.

Ok, you're pushing yourself closer to that category too.

As "dumb or scum"? Really? How so?

Lynch -3 is near a lynch, especially with a runaway bandwagon like that. At this point, we still need information.

Yes, if they're playing dumb they'll drop the ball in lylo, and this doesn't make sense, how?

This is basic play theory, since dumb play is anti-town, you have somebody who is more likely inherently to be scum

You being a "numbers guy" is really showing here if you consider L-3 to be "near a lynch." L-3 is a pretty safe distance from a lynch, and if someone had been quick lynched this early by wagoners I'd welcome it because more likely than not you'll have a lot of scum late on the wagon which leads to early and easy scum lynches.

"Dumb or useless" townies DO NOT always drop the ball in lylo. Go check out Food Court mafia if it's still around. I was the SK with two townies left. One of the townies ended up hammering me for (IMO) some of the worst reasons I've ever heard. HE WON THE GAME FOR TOWN. Just assuming people who you label to be "bad or useless townies" will drop the ball in lylo is just plain ignorant, biased, and exclusionary in nature.

As for the whole Gheb thing, I didn't really get an "OMG QUICKLYNCH GOGOGO" intent out of his post regarding you. I understood him as being content with having and early lynch but he wasn't pushing for people to lynch you ASAP. I'll look at it again but I don't it that way.

I'm also gonna go over Rei's couple of posts to see if theres any merit to my nagging suspicion there.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Furthermore, there's also the rest of the day of scum-hunting to do, other bandwagons can happen during the lead-up to the lynch, it's impossible for town to be active (and therefore gain information) during night, unless they're in masonries with night-communication (which I believe most have).

What makes you think they do...?

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

That lynch would be pretty legit even this early. All his attempts to attack other players are very weak and / or based on stereotypes ("scum does ____," and "town does____") and are clear signs of pseudo scumhunting. Picking the easiest targets for bad reasons ... now that's whatI consider a scumtell.

I think your pushing for a lynch too early, Without most of the other players it seems like an idiotic and impulsive action. D1 is the most important day, try to string it out the most you can.

out of RVS's

 

[Dark_Ermac]

There's a great difference between someone acknowledging that they believe an early lynch is good, and someone who actively tries to get people to jump on a bandwagon.

 

[Overswarm]

Why you keep focusing on activity as a reason to lynch people THIS early in the game, when YOU yourself said that the game has barely been open for 24 hours and we should give people a chance to actually post, is absolutely beyond me. You call for people to scum hunt, yet you activity DO NOT scum hunt by focusing so much on setting your own personal standards for activity and acting like everyone should abide by them. Furthermore, you go and say that we shouldn't hold KevinM culpable for inactivity, but everyone else who hasn't posted how ever much you say is "useless" and should be wagoned. What is it with you BBR's and your double standards?

Basic reading comprehension should allow you to see that, no, I did not push for a wagon, quick lynch, or anything of the sort in the section you quoted... nor have I mentioned it anywhere. I've called out those that have been viewing the thread (like meta-kirby, xonar) but not posting anything to get information flowing; they both have reasonable reasons for posting and even if they didn't, it doesn't matter. They're posting.

My "protection" of KevinM wasn't me saying he shouldn't be lynched for inactivity... he was in my list, if you look closely. Rather I said he hadn't viewed the thread since the game started and thus could not be expected to post.

It's not that complicated, nor is it a double standard.

1.) I will not answer that question and NEITHER SHOULD VULT because it is blatant information fishing. We already both know the Vult was dumb for even claiming that in the first place, so why in god's name are you now asking him to pour salt on the wound?

Because it's useful information for town.

It prevents outsiders from interpreting things in a way that results in anti-town actions and helps town recognize connections. The same reason you confirmed yourself to be his neighbor, kinda. Vult claiming you are his neighbor and you saying "no I'm not" would result in Vult not trusting his neighbor's actions as well as town not trusting Vult's actions. Either way, you have a connection with one or more players. Now that we know there is a connection, if either of you are scum we may be able to find out information from the other. "Information fishing" only is detrimental if it is detrimental to the town; knowing that your neighborhood has more than 2 rather than 2 isn't that detrimental now that you've announced right away that you're in a neighborhood with them.

More importantly, let's assume you are both town and you two are "buddying up" and there are two other people in your neighborhood. You all trust each other a decent amount and decide that Player X has to go, and three of you push hard on this guy and he is lynched and turns up to be town. Now that we are aware you are neighbors, we can view your actions in this light. People seemingly buddying up for no reason could be neighbors.

2.) Can't answer this but I have a pretty good idea of why he did it and I don't think it is particularly important. It has to do with pre-game discussion we had in our neighborhood and a statement I made without being able to follow up because we can't post there during the day phase.

3.) See 2.

4.) See 2.

Excellent!

Don't we have a rule against doing **** like this? Like attempts to break the game using non-mafia metadata? Play mafia dude and actually scumhunt instead of trying to catch people PMing each other and other resources OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THE GAME to indict people. This is equivalent to kicking someone in the shins to beat them in a game of smash because you're employing resources outside of the scope of the game in order to try to win. Even if you don't agree with that, it's still hardcore against the spirit of the game.

Rules against metadata? You could just do what 3/4ths of the players did here and just... turn that info off. O_o

Regardless, this is information that is publicly available and can be used to simply make people post. Saying "xonar is PMing someone" or "meta-kirby is viewing the thread but not posting" doesn't do anything except make them post; the only time it would start a wagon is if they did it repeatedly and didn't comment on it. The goal is to get people to post.

I've played in way more games with Gheb than you have and I'm telling you that you have a horribly flawed meta and I would encourage you to stop trying to meta people like that because it is an AWFUL way to scum hunt. Seriously, go read newbie 3.

I have 100% win rate in mafia as of today and have been playing for quite some time. I'm pretty used to mafia games by now. I'd catch mafia by how they moved their eyes and hands in campfire games, and I'll catch people based on how they answer nonsense questions in online games. I use all the tools at my disposal.

If you think you're unique in that you change your playstyle from game to game, new flash, any mafia player worth his salt either has a.) a very consistent playstyle in all their games regardless of alignment or b.) highly variant playstyles that change from game to game regardless of alignment. If you didn't pick up on it, the key here is "regardless of alignment." Basically what I'm trying to tell you, is trying to meta experience players is the scrubbiest excuse for scum hunting of all time because it DOESN'T WORK and even if a person you do attempt to meta does end up being scum, you can basically chalk that up to luck because saying "I told you so" doesn't exactly fly in mafia.

Basically, Gheb has been both patient AND aggressive in plenty of games as both town and maf. This meta attack is just plain bad.

*facepalm*

If I told you "Here's a guy who can change colors from red, blue, or green. He's guilty or innocent. Sometimes he's red when he's guilty, but other times he's blue. He's been green, red, or blue when innocent. Once he was green when guilty, too." you'd come to the logical, and correct, conclusion that the colors were useless precisely because the guy is deliberately changing the colors. However, if you then asked him "So... I see you're red. Why are you red?", his response to that is not necessarily useless and if he seems uncomfortable with you asking about the color red and changes to blue, or becomes indifferent and ignores you and stays red, both are important bits of information that help you determine whether he is guilty or innocent.

This carries over to your whole defense of adum, because the fact that he said a very noncontroversial line to most people (i.e. activity is pro town) in two games, one of which he was town, doesn't mean **** in this game. Easily agreeable statements like that are things that good scum will say ALL THE TIME PRECISELY BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WILL GOBBLE IT UP AND ASSUME "OMG HE WAS TOWN AND HE SAID THAT BEFORE, HE SAID IT NOW SO HE'S POLLY TOWN DURRRR". Any scumbag can say stuff like that without significantly working against his goal as a scumbag, and just score tons of townie point from people who only LOOK AT CONTENT, not INTENT like you are.

Except he said more than that and this is his second game, so I highly doubt he's as much of a Chameleon as myself or, by your claims, Gheb. Looking through all his posts in the BBR he had multiple statements that are almost word-for-word the exact same and it brought about the same result as it is here. I'm interested in the responses to them, really.

You seem a little over zealous in your posts. Keep it up, I'm learning a lot.

Yeah, you "squeeze as much blood" as you can from STRONG accusations and cases, but you don't just latch incessantly on to a case because you assume that switching topics banishes old cases into the twisting nether forever. Your one example is not the rule, and I know for a fact that is it VERY easy to switch topics of discussion, see how they play out, and ultimate return to a previous topic. Taking this fundamentalist "all or nothing" stance is really problematic and restrictive.

Are you kidding? It's incredibly common for early cases to simply be forgotten. My early wagon in DBZ, Scamp's in TMNT, Swordgard in FF6, Vult's in this game... it's practically the rule. You don't let good cases go until you have a reason to. Dropping one hazy case for another hazy case is silly.

You and overswarm both pitch this line of argument with the assumption that the town will always catch "bad" activity. Bad assumption, and that's why being active is not INHERENTLY pro-town. It is generally protown, but it is not inherently so. How else would scum win games? If your logic was true, town would win every game because the scum would be active and the town would always ultimately weed out the bad activity and lynch all the scum. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Scum win all the time, and thus, activity absolutely CANNOT be inherently pro-town.

You need to take a logic class, I think.

I'm also gonna go over Rei's couple of posts to see if theres any merit to my nagging suspicion there.

I'll be doing the same. I'm off work now, and will be getting my thoughts out there on this tomorrow.

 

[#HBC | Dancer]

Okay I guess I should start by saying ahead of time when I'm going to be active. I have school, Monday to Friday, and I usually don't get home until 3:00p.m EST, so I'm probably not going to be able to make posts inbetween then. I might make post in the early mourning but probably not. Summer is coming up, though, on the 27th for me, and when that happens I'm going to pretty be active at all times. Same goes for the weekends.

I'm going to be catching up using a "steam of consciousness" technique. So I'm going to be posting my thoughts on everything that catches my eye, even if it already has been resolved, as I read it. So I might vote for someone, vote for someone else, then vote for them again, all in the same post. So, anyways, here goes nothing.

---

Overswarm taking the longest to confirm already makes a strike against him right against the bat. I know scum likes to take the longest to confirm so they can talk strategies pre-game.

Overswarm also starts talking about meta. I don't really see how it will be useful at all in this game but I guess the information couldn't hurt at the very least.

No Day 1 flavor makes me .

The RVS happens then, which I missed. Let me just say this, though: Kefka > Sephiroth. That is all.

posts 53 & 54: Vult votes Frozen and saids something about not keeping secrets with Summoner? I think I'm going to have to keep reading to find out what he's talking about.

@Guus post 57: I like the RVS. I mean, I do believe it is the best way to get things rolling.

post 60: Uh, adumbrodeus votes Guus for askin a question? Weird.

Yeah okay at post 64 and upwards people start to get suspicious of why Vult didn't explain his vote on Frozen, and that he told that he will explain it later. I'll like to see where this goes. Also, I kinda think it's weird how Vult said earlier that he does not like keeping secrets but decided not to explain his vote. There's a scummy point against him for now.

People start band wagoning Vult at post 67. I'm hoping this will get Vult to explain himself, and I actually like that people are doing this.

Okay now people start talking how scum likes to buy time before they make posts at 71. I think this is plausible, and I don't really see why Vult can't explain his vote. However, you guys are going to hate me, fyi, cause I do this a lot.

post 73: Yeah, my feelings so far are reflected in this post.

Vult continues not explaining stuff. Grr. . . I hate that.

post 77: That's true, but I also want to give people who take stances like that early a chance, because I know that they know they are risking a lynch for if they appear wrong too many times, but in that case I guess maybe it's best just to not even listin to them (so there are less mislynches). =/


post 78: Uh, I don't really know what a soft stance is either. >_>

post 79: Overswarm does some meta of Vult. I guess that helps him a bit, but I don't like to rely on meta to much, so I'm not going to just fully let Vult off the hook here.

post 81: Vult edits. Eww. Also, he tries to defend himself by pointing out that it's too soon for adumbrodeus to have a list of who he thought was usually/scum. I disagree, I think it's never to early to start keeping track of who you think is scum, although the reads might not be very good, but hey, one's reads can chance as time goes by. Vult also mentions how he ending the RVS for adumbrodeus. So what, though? Didn't you end it by acting a little scummy? So then what should that matter?

post 82: Overswarm explains to Vult that he misread what adumbrodeus was talking about. I don't really like Overswarm interfering with something that adumbrodeus really should of pointed out. Also states that he has to explain himself. I agree.

post 83: A nice post by Frozen. Nothing much more to say here, but I'm still curious about Vult's "secret" that I guess he's hiding. I know he could be hiding it for the benefit of the town, but I still don't like the way he just put out the fact that he had a secret from the geco.

Hmm. . . the more I think about, the more I figure I should do this; for now. vote Vult

post 86: Earlier Frozen voted adumbrodeus for his reason for voting Guus. In this post, adumbrodeus defends himself by stating he though Guus was taking a stance against the RVS. I'm willing to believe that adumbrodeus was just mistaken by Guus' question. Also talks about some basic scumhunting stuff. Questions Frozen for voting for him when he stated that he didn't want to. I kinda thought Frozen just jokingly said that, but whatever. Maybe adumbrodeus is on to something here, maybe not.

post 88: Here, I kinda feel Vult misses the point of what SM was talking about. States that he is getting "reads" from his actions. I'm kinda confused here. I don't really know what action Vult did that we are even referring to. I'm going to have to go back real quick. . .

Okay I guess we're talking about Vult's post 54 and 62. I just hope Vult will care to share some of those "reads" of his with us in the future.

post 89: My thoughts on Vult so far exactly

post 90: More pressure on Vult form adumbrodeus. Tells Vult to play better and warns him about the danger of any gambit he may be using. This sounds good to me.

That's all for now, I'm going to a BDay party right now. I'll be back with more later.

 

[Overswarm]

Overswarm taking the longest to confirm already makes a strike against him right against the bat. I know scum likes to take the longest to confirm so they can talk strategies pre-game.

It was posted on Wednesday at 5:30 p.m.; I work from 8:15-4:30 and generally don't post much after that. I'm currently sitting at work killing time before I can leave to get to a tournament (can't get to Nope's until 8 p.m and he's only an hour away. I live an hour the opposite direction, so going home isn't an option).

On Wednesday I was out with my girlfriend until 4 a.m.; I actually slept in my car outside of work because driving home was pointless. You can basically see everything I'm saying here:

OS Activity:

You basically get Monday-Friday, 8:15-4:30, and everything else is incredibly sporadic. That's just how it goes. After work I'm generally out with the lady, and when I'm not I'm at a tournament, playing starcraft, or some other entertainment-based medium not involving smashboards... you'll just get posts when I can make 'em.

The RVS happens then, which I missed. Let me just say this, though: Kefka > Sephiroth. That is all.

*salutes*

What post did Vult comment on Summoner?

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

The RVS happens then, which I missed. Let me just say this, though: Kefka < Sephiroth. That is all.

fixed

In all seriousness, when you get back, I want to hear your view on Rei.

 

[Overswarm]

Seph, could you outline your case in detail for us?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

1. Not Mafia
2. I don't assume anything
3. Town[/COLOR][/B]

Here's why I said that I don't want to lynch someone so soon when it went to Adumbrodeus.
Because I did not at all find Adumbrodeus suspicious. When the votes were on Vult, I understood why they were there and agreed with them.
Vult did something stupid to begin with. I'd lynch him of nothing else came up.
Adumbrodeus, I couldn't see the reasoning behind voting or wanting to lynch him.

This is a mistake done again and again. Do you really think the most obvious lynch target is always the best one? Vult has barely done anything scummy and people suddenly want to lynch him?

That's not scumhunting - it's looking for a scapegoat. Adum is clearly the player who is most guilty of it and therefore by far the biggest suspect.

Someone just rushed onto a band wagon without much of an arguement ,and then jumped off when he was pointed out. How is this not a big scum tell?

How is it?

Gheb, You tried to push for a quick lynch on D1 and before everyone had a chance to post.

Unvote,

Vote: Gheb

I would like to hear from you concerning this.

Not only is this a blatant parrot but also completely wrong. Show me where and why I'm talking about lynching anybody here and now.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Overswarm, if your whole case on me is based on meta then you should look for something better. Ignoring the fact that you only played one game with me (which isn't nearly enough to judge me) you should know that I never play my game based on allignment but only on my role.

For reference:
I played a pretty hard-core antitown game in Scum Wars Mafia even though I was the town vigilante. Why? To make sure I would not get nightkilled so I can help town as long as possible.
On the other hand I played super protown in Pokémafia where I pinned the two Mafia fractions and pushed for a lynch vs both of them. I was the serial killer in that game.

In other words: Just because you feel like I've been playing a safer game in TMNT as a townie than I do now doesn't mean I'm not town this time. It simply means that I have a different role.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Not only is this a blatant parrot but also completely wrong. Show me where and why I'm talking about lynching anybody here and now.

Here you go.

That lynch would be pretty legit even this early. All his attempts to attack other players are very weak and / or based on stereotypes ("scum does ____," and "town does____") and are clear signs of pseudo scumhunting. Picking the easiest targets for bad reasons ... now that's whatI consider a scumtell.

His lynch would still be legit. Some players didn't post yet. His posts are unbearable nonetheless.

Both are stating he should be lynched, and it is still too early in the game at this point for a lynch.

How is it?

It's obviously just a move of drawing off suspicion, he thought if he was on the bandwagon, he wouldn't have to post and people would get off his back for not posting. But when I called him on it he quickly changed his vote thinking it would undo the action he just made. This is a scummy move, if you don't think it is your either blind, or trying to save him.

Most of the other players either think it was either a useless or scummy move, why don't you?

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Overswarm, if your whole case on me is based on meta then you should look for something better. Ignoring the fact that you only played one game with me (which isn't nearly enough to judge me) you should know that I never play my game based on allignment but only on my role.

For reference:
I played a pretty hard-core antitown game in Scum Wars Mafia even though I was the town vigilante. Why? To make sure I would not get nightkilled so I can help town as long as possible.
On the other hand I played super protown in Pokémafia where I pinned the two Mafia fractions and pushed for a lynch vs both of them. I was the serial killer in that game.

In other words: Just because you feel like I've been playing a safer game in TMNT as a townie than I do now doesn't mean I'm not town this time. It simply means that I have a different role.

Are you claiming your not town then, or you have a special role?

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

EBWOP:

Most of the other players think it was either a useless or scummy move, why don't you?

Two either's lol

 

[#HBC | FrozeηFlame]

I'm about to go out to eat n' such for a friend's birthday but I wanted to get a few quick responses in before I go. A full response to your post is forthcoming OS, and this post does not do justice to the dialogue you pose, but its just a few things I wanted to point out:

Regarding the use of metadata:

Yes, I could just turn that information off, but why should I be forced to hide my activities when none of that is within the scope of the mafia game. I shouldn't HAVE to do ANYTHING that isn't within the scope of a mafia game in order to protect my ability to win a mafia game. That's like telling someone to wear shin guards while playing smash because someone might kick them in the shins and cause them to lose. Why should I have to do that when taking action outside of the scope of a game in order to win a game is complete and utter BS?

Regarding revealing more information about my neighborhood:

Yes, that information COULD be useful to the town, but it can also just as easily be useful to the mafia. This goes back to my post, #83. The information you are asking for is not particularly relevant at this time and thus the marginal benefit you or anyone else might gain from revealing it is not worth the chance that the mafia could use that information better. Basically this is the short answer, but I'll probably respond again more elaborately.

- I'm really having a hard time discerning if you're being sarcastic about the "keep being zealous" thing. =/

- Please refrain from saying quip **** like "I think you need to take a logic class" but then refuse to provide any kind of logical analysis to back such a statement up. It's really childish.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Both are stating he should be lynched, and it is still too early in the game at this point for a lynch.

Neither is talking about a lynch here and now. I can say "hey I think we should lynch this guy" but that's by no means a quicklynch.

It's obviously just a move of drawing off suspicion, he thought if he was on the bandwagon, he wouldn't have to post and people would get off his back for not posting. But when I called him on it he quickly changed his vote thinking it would undo the action he just made. This is a scummy move, if you don't think it is your either blind, or trying to save him.

Most of the other players either think it was either a useless or scummy move, why don't you?

Quite simply because it isn't. It's harder for the town to be consistent than for the mafia.

Are you claiming your not town then, or you have a special role?

I claim to not be Town Mason.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Too much flaming is going on, (Zing) I think we can play a game without insulting each-other.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

Neither is talking about a lynch here and now. I can say "hey I think we should lynch this guy" but that's by no means a quicklynch.

Let me spell it out for you.

That lynch would be pretty legit even this early.

 

[Dark_Ermac]

You need to take a logic class, I think.

Your statement is flawed, OS. Town can NOT be based on activity alone, because if a mafia almost never posts, they greatly reduce their chances of winning by not actively taking part in the discussion. Of course, there's still the possibility of a mafioso being a bit too active, as I've seen very active players subtly controlling entire games on MS a few times before. A lot of the time, the more experienced players, as mafia, will try to convince people that the idiotic newcomer is actually a really bad mafioso.

 

[Vult Redux]

Because he's jumpy.

How does that conclude = scum?

1. You two are now confirmed neighbors. Don't give names or numbers, but are there MORE in your neighborhood or are you alone?

Why do you need to know this?

2. Vurt, why did you announce FFlame was a Neighbor?

You would have quicklynched me had I not.

3. Vurt, why did you put suspicion on FFlame so early on?

Not disclosing until I have a chance to consult in private.

Basically everything you asked I have already answered in conversations with other people.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

It's still not pushing for a quicklynch. Since I believe him to be scum I wouldn't mind him dead.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

It's still not pushing for a quicklynch. Since I believe him to be scum I wouldn't mind him dead.

A.K.A. quick lynch.

 

[-Rei-]

just got back from class

gonna read through on what i missed

 

[Dark_Ermac]

For the last time, just because he wants someone dead doesn't mean he's actively attempting to get a quicklynch!!

Also, Since Vult/Frozen are potentially neighbors, I believe that it's of the opposing sides variety, and Vult is attempting to off Frozen, who's on the other team.

His not posting the reason for his vote was initially because he was the only one to be able to understand his reasons, and his attempting to explain them would've outed him as a neighbor anyway.

Now, the only thing left to do is determine which of these two is on the mafia side.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

This has to be the most pathetic excuse for scumhunting ive ever read. Do you really think ANYONE would be as stupid as to go for a quicklynch D1?
Need more Guus votes.

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

For the last time, just because he wants someone dead doesn't mean he's actively attempting to get a quicklynch!!

So, pushing for a lynch early in the game, the first day of D1 in fact, without all the players even beginning to post, is not a quick lynch.

Gotcha.

 

[Vult Redux]

Also, Since Vult/Frozen are potentially neighbors, I believe that it's of the opposing sides variety

why?

He looks pretty Town to me.

 

[Dark_Ermac]

Then why the vote?!

 

[Jim Morrison]

Then why the vote?!

Could you please read up more? Vult already said it was because of something that was interpreted wrong, but he changed his mind on Frozen later.

Xonar, do you want more votes on me because of a Meta that I'm going to be useless?

 

[adumbrodeus]

This carries over to your whole defense of adum, because the fact that he said a very noncontroversial line to most people (i.e. activity is pro town) in two games, one of which he was town, doesn't mean **** in this game. Easily agreeable statements like that are things that good scum will say ALL THE TIME PRECISELY BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WILL GOBBLE IT UP AND ASSUME "OMG HE WAS TOWN AND HE SAID THAT BEFORE, HE SAID IT NOW SO HE'S POLLY TOWN DURRRR". Any scumbag can say stuff like that without significantly working against his goal as a scumbag, and just score tons of townie point from people who only LOOK AT CONTENT, not INTENT like you are.


Yeah, you "squeeze as much blood" as you can from STRONG accusations and cases, but you don't just latch incessantly on to a case because you assume that switching topics banishes old cases into the twisting nether forever. Your one example is not the rule, and I know for a fact that is it VERY easy to switch topics of discussion, see how they play out, and ultimate return to a previous topic. Taking this fundamentalist "all or nothing" stance is really problematic and restrictive.

You and overswarm both pitch this line of argument with the assumption that the town will always catch "bad" activity. Bad assumption, and that's why being active is not INHERENTLY pro-town. It is generally protown, but it is not inherently so. How else would scum win games? If your logic was true, town would win every game because the scum would be active and the town would always ultimately weed out the bad activity and lynch all the scum. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Scum win all the time, and thus, activity absolutely CANNOT be inherently pro-town.

If that's how you define tunnel vision, then I DO NOT have tunnel vision. When have I tried to make everything you've said look like a scum tell? I haven't. I don't think you positing this strange definition is a scum tell. I'm simply addressing a lot of what you say either because its scummy or highly debatable or just poorly informed. When I think something is actually SCUMMY I've SAID THAT in my responses.

Yeah but they have to **** up first to be considered "dumb or scum" so even if a scum tries to "pretend" to be dumb town, they're being scrutinized anyway and its up to the town to discern the deceptive intent of post pleading "dumbness". If the scum succeed at tricking the town, well, then that's good for them because that's their entire JOB in the game.


As "dumb or scum"? Really? How so?

You being a "numbers guy" is really showing here if you consider L-3 to be "near a lynch." L-3 is a pretty safe distance from a lynch, and if someone had been quick lynched this early by wagoners I'd welcome it because more likely than not you'll have a lot of scum late on the wagon which leads to early and easy scum lynches.

"Dumb or useless" townies DO NOT always drop the ball in lylo. Go check out Food Court mafia if it's still around. I was the SK with two townies left. One of the townies ended up hammering me for (IMO) some of the worst reasons I've ever heard. HE WON THE GAME FOR TOWN. Just assuming people who you label to be "bad or useless townies" will drop the ball in lylo is just plain ignorant, biased, and exclusionary in nature.

As for the whole Gheb thing, I didn't really get an "OMG QUICKLYNCH GOGOGO" intent out of his post regarding you. I understood him as being content with having and early lynch but he wasn't pushing for people to lynch you ASAP. I'll look at it again but I don't it that way.

I'm also gonna go over Rei's couple of posts to see if theres any merit to my nagging suspicion there.

You seem to be missing a fundamental point, town CANNOT win without activity period, therefore activity is inherently town because it gives the town a chance to win by picking up on scum tells.

No, town won't pick up on every one, but we make it more likely by picking off useless players (who are also more likely to be scum).

Speaking of useless players, I'm not gonna say that they're gonna drop the ball every time, statistically they gotta win a blind pick every so often but, they're far more likely to then somebody who is playing intelligently.


You're tunneling by taking actions that are at face strongly pro-town but could be a guise opted by scum in order to survive and force poor lynches, and interpreting it in the most scum way possible with no evidence of scummyness.

Even the initial action, it was me supporting activity which the thread needs for town to win, and I back off when he explained it in a way that satisfied me (pressure successful), where's the evidence that it's actually scummy?


That's what tunneling is, having tunnel-vision, fixating on a person as a particular role, and then interpreting everything in relation to that conclusion rather then examining evidence as it actually is.


At least gheb is trying to make a case, you're just tossing **** against a wall to see what sticks.

This is a mistake done again and again. Do you really think the most obvious lynch target is always the best one? Vult has barely done anything scummy and people suddenly want to lynch him?

That's not scumhunting - it's looking for a scapegoat. Adum is clearly the player who is most guilty of it and therefore by far the biggest suspect.

Anti-town play is bad for town, whether it's scum or not.

It'd be great to go after a confirmed scum every night, but when it comes down to voting time, if it's a mislynch, in which case does the town lose more?

Obviously the stronger player, weak players are possible scum, especially since bad activity confuses town and makes them more likely, and you need as strong a team in lylo as you can get, with confirmed town being the only exception to this rule. Inactives are even worse.


So, what's scummy about this? I've established an opinion about gameplay that's common among higher level play, furthermore, you've been cited a specific example of me doing this as a townie, which while does not prove that it's a pro-town play here, PROVES THAT I WOULD DO IT WHILE PLAYING TOWN, and is therefore, not fundamentally a scumtell.

So, why are you convinced that I'm not a townie attempting to remove scumhunt?

This has to be the most pathetic excuse for scumhunting ive ever read. Do you really think ANYONE would be as stupid as to go for a quicklynch D1?
Need more Guus votes.

That was what surprised me, his statement pretty strongly implied it since when confronted on it, he essentially said he wouldn't mind.