Super Mafia Bros Brawl - Game Topic (GAME OVER)

[Bardiche]

You know what I just realized? We've been keeping someone out.

##VOTE: Nitori

Poor Nitori didn't get joke voted even once. I blame the cardboard box. Get rid of it so we notice you!

[QuietRain]

3 pages in already?  Geez guys.  Weekends are dead times for Gate and I, so checking in a time or two a day is about all I'm good for until I get back to work.

##Vote: Bardiche.   Believe me, you're the only Pokemon going into a ball. You like hiding in a shell, you go for it.  And that goes for the trainer, too.  Keep your pokeballs to yourself, buster!  NObody puts Pika in a ball.  (or a corner for that matter)

[Carthrat]

Votes have been spread around to little effect, and a few people are going above and beyond the virtually-mandatory early jokevote to have multiple jokevotes. Rather than spreading stuff everywhere, I think we may as well start, uh, focusing.

I was thinking of voting for Meeple or Bardiche for rampant jokevote switching, but Bardiche seems to be a newbie and I think a newbie scum is less likely to toss votes around like that than a newbie town. Meeple seems chatty, has discussed avaliable evidence (trifling as it is), even if did change his vote from Shale to me for no reason and thusly encourage pointless switching.

Instead, I think everyone should pile up on Capn'K. He's already got two votes on him! He switched from Mario to Kirby for no real reason! The other people with two votes on them seem less suspicious to me! Pileups are more exciting than stand-alone singular votes for random people! Get yours in now!

[Hunter Sopko]

To be more specific, Stobor is a reference to Heinlein's Tunnel in the Sky. IE, one of his worst books. Students on a survival course to an unknown planet are told to beware of "stobor". I won't spoil what stobor actually ARE though.

AHHHHHHHHH! ::Runs around, batting at the flower:: Get it off, get it off, get it off, get it off, get it off!

It seems like anytime I vote or someone votes against me it goes up 5%... so... my vote's staying on Meeple for now.

[Captain K.]

Instead, I think everyone should pile up on Capn'K. He's already got two votes on him! He switched from Mario to Kirby for no real reason! The other people with two votes on them seem less suspicious to me! Pileups are more exciting than stand-alone singular votes for random people! Get yours in now!

Protecting my stylish pink hat is a perfectly valid reason to vote.

[Bardiche]

I -was- going to ask whether or not there would be any indication when we'd move past the "loljoek" stage and into the "srs business" stage, but was worried if wanting to get to the action quick would be considered "ohnoez scum"... or something. I dunno. I have an experience of getting lynched first thing regardless of what I do.

Also, Carthrat. I must note I find it a little suspicious you vote to pile up on Cap'n K. Especially since we already have a a pile-up on you as well. I note Meeple voted on you as well, who you suggested, alongside me, to be eligible for a first round KO. You said I was a newbie so that it could be fine, yet offered no explanation why to switch from Meeple to Cap'n K other than that Cap'n K seems to have a pile on 'em already.

Why would Cap'n K be a more solid choice of a first round lynch than you? You are equally, if not more suspicious. To me, anyway. It seems a bit absurd that one with two votes on 'em already would quickly call for a vote on someone in the same boat.

Care to explain?

For now...

WITHDRAW VOTE

[Bardiche]

Oh blast.

##UNVOTE

Screw you, ##'s, you make me miserable.

[Taishyr]

Mmm. Strange one attacks me, says he wants to protect his hat. But I just make more hats for everyone and by everyone I mean Kirby! This plumber is silly and I can get his hat later, there's no reason to bother right now.

Seriousness would not be a bad thing, but we are also only eight hours in; not everyone has had the time to check in, and as such we may leave some people behind a bit. I suppose what I suggest is to take it slow; we are not under  time pressure, as long as we ensure discussion. If this makes sense. I'm not sure on my own coherency, today. <(^^;)>

EDIT: Gah! The Kirby, ninja'd by the other pink fluffball thing! Still, an overabundance of pink is a positively splendiferous thing, and-

ack, I seem to have kept more of El Cid than I thought! Stupid words, you are not a hat for Kirby to wear.

[Carthrat]

Meeple discussed some stuff about percentages, Cap'nK made jokes about his hat. One person here is taking things mildly seriously! One person isn't at all. I did in fact mention his chattiness in passing in my post, so... yeah.

I think it is generally better to train someone early in the game than to screw around with meaningless votes spread around the entire population, all that does is trivialize each vote and make discussion difficult (since there's nothing to discuss until someone sets up and does something.)

Why Cap'n K over me? That's easy! Only a retard would vote for himself, so I don't think it's fair to expect me to analyse myself for suspiciousness. As I said, I'm partial to early trains- and just because I have a couple votes on me isn't going to stop me following a course of action I feel is generally sound.

Why do you feel it's absurd/suspicious for me to act this way? Furthermore, why do you think trying to push into the seriousbusiness stage is likely to get you accused of scumminess? o-O

[Bardiche]

I'm used to being suspected. I've played mafia elsewhere, too.

Okay, see, here's the train of thought that makes me feel you are acting suspicious (given what little information we have):

Meeple, Carthrat and Cap'n K have an equal amount of votes on them, which is two.
Meeple voted on Carthrat. Cap'n K did not.
Carthrat highlighted that Meeple -could- be a potential candidate. Says Meeple talked a lot and discussed things a bit, but also mentioned something about promoting being wishy washy with votes.

and thusly encourage pointless switching.

Exactly as you said it.

It is clear at this point Cap'n K switched from Mario to Kirby under the wavering banner of joke voting. Recall? He voted for Kirby to discourage Kirby from stealing his hat.

So while at the start you say the joke voting must end... You make a mention that Meeple's actions encourage pointless switching, yet at the same time you condemn someone that did exactly that and encourage us to KO them based on the fact that they:

1) Have two votes.
2) Were joke voting.

To me this seems absurd because you are contradicting yourself. You said it was time to focus, and yet your vote seems a joke to me.

##VOTE: Carthrat

Until I feel you provide a satisfying explanation as to why I should not be so suspicious of you, I think I'll reverse your suggested pile-up and elect to pile on you instead.

[EvilTom]

Also, Carthrat. I must note I find it a little suspicious you vote to pile up on Cap'n K. Especially since we already have a a pile-up on you as well.

Those were my thoughts as well, but more because it's so early in the game and Rat is already suggesting we start a 'train'. ('Instead, I think everyone should pile up on Capn'K.... Get yours in now!'). That kind of train rush tactic has never been pro-town, in my experience.
I can understand wanting to get the show on the road, but the circumstances of "lynch that guy quick because he's not me!" when they're both 'leading' on 2 votes.. seems rather jumpy?  Especially since there's no impending time limit and the game has just begun.. and it's based off joke-votes.

Question to Rat: 'but Bardiche seems to be a newbie and I think a newbie scum is less likely to toss votes around like that than a newbie town.' Any particular reason why? Sounds iffy to me.

Ah ninja'd by Rat.

Rat, it's supicious because you're both on 2 joke votes, and you call for a lynch train on the other guy. Yes we know you're not going to call for one on yourself, thankyou for stating the obvious >.>
It's a nice cover to say "I'm getting serious discussion started", but..it's not, really. Your reasons basically amount to:
'that guy has 2 votes, he is not me, he has made joke votes, therefore let's all KO him'.
You'll forgive us for not trusting you.

##Vote: Carthrat

Argh Ninja'd again, by Bardiche. I'll read it in a sec.

[EvilTom]

Aaaand the puffball basically said what I did, just faster >.>
*takes a swig of Lon-Lon milk*

[Meeplelard]

Meeple discussed some stuff about percentages, Cap'nK made jokes about his hat. One person here is taking things mildly seriously! One person isn't at all. I did in fact mention his chattiness in passing in my post, so... yeah.

I did, discuss some stuff about percentages...in a pure mechanical way to prove that it was not based on Vote Counts.  People were wondering just how the flower status worked, I was merely ruling out one of Shale's potential methods (which he probably wouldn't have brought up if he had noticed there was a second page, but that's an aside.)

Frankly, the closest thing to serious discussion we had for a while was "Ok, what's flower status do?"  We at least have some idea of what it does! (Damage (seems to be 5%) at some intervals we're not certain of; we at least, especially due to mod verification, know its not Vote Counts though!)

Granted, recently, we're starting to get into serious discussion, with Rat saying "go after Capt K!" (Though, at a glance, that looked like he was kind of being facetious) and people calling him out on it.  Keeping my vote on Rat, since while yes, it was a joke vote...I feel no reason to remove it at the moment.

[Yakumo]

I think you guys are overreacting here.  One, this is pretty normal for the rodent, I can't really call it a scumtell if  he does it all the time.  Two, he stated his reason for doing this: nobody is going to feel threatened enough to cause anything to happen if everyone is sitting with one or two votes, the game will just stagnate unless somebody shakes it up a bit, which he's apparently trying to do.  Three, his stated reason for not hitting the newbie makes sense, though I disagree.  He's saying that a newbie playing scum is going to try not to stand out like that and is more likely to just kinda sit back and react, if I'm understanding him correctly.  The fact that the apparent newbie is stating he is not a newbie really doesn't matter for the statement in question due to the order they came in.   I do think he's right about one thing at least, this strategy is going to cause more worthwhile conversation than the jokevotes were.

Bardiche, what exactly is your point in that last post?  Carthrat wasn't leaving Meeple alone because he was encouraging switching, he said that while both players were doing that, Meeple was at least putting in some content related to the game, and Captain K said nothing that really mattered at all.  Also, even if he hadn't mentioned that at all, what would you expect him to do, vote for both of them?  Oh wait, he can't.  So... I guess I don't follow any of your logic.  Care to explain a bit?  Here's some incentive, because my vote isn't doing anything useful right now anyway.

##Unvote: Excal
##Vote: Bardiche

[Carthrat]

Bardiche's concern about someone getting the game started being considered 'ohnoezscum' has turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Bardiche: You're correct in that Meeple and Cap'n K both did a similar (bad) thing in switching around jokevotes. The reason I want to stick with Cap'n over switching to Meeple is that Meeple actually contributed a bit of theorizing and discussion to the game. I said this twice already, where's the contradiction?

EvilTom: Firstly, I think a newbie scum is more likely timid than bold, and thus won't throw around a bunch of jokevotes and generally create a high profile early.

The stuff about me being jumpy because I have two votes on myself is kinda retarded. You could use pretty much the same argument for any case I make against anyone, under the pretext that I'm encouraging a lynch because I, myself, don't want to get lynched. (Furthermore, two votes. Seriously. That's not worth getting worried about. I guess four is.)

Furthermore, the way both of you speak, it's like you're saying I'm not allowed to vote for anyone with multiple votes on them because I, myself, have a couple votes on me. I find that incredibly disturbing.

<->

Ninja'd by Yak. Mwaf.

[Nitori]

I...don't see the attack against Rat for trying to start things, really, since someone had to come out with something to advance the game further. Plus, the way I read his statement was that he seemed way more on the discussion that such a pileup would generate rather than pushing a serious case; trying to do the latter would be pointless, there isn't even close to enough info this early. I do disagree with removing Bardiche from consideration simply due to an assumption, but that is likely a difference in playstyle.

Barring that, everyone's posted at least once and the topic hasn't even been open for 24 hours, which is how long I extend a line of credit for the first post. I feel (seconding Yakko), that both Tom and Bardiche have slightly overevaluated this play...but Tom, in his post, implies that "the game has just begun", and that that is somehow too early for "serious" content. Can I have some clarification on this~?

##UNVOTE: Carthrat
##VOTE: EvilTom

[Luther Lansfeld]

Pfeh. The person trying to kickstart the game gets two votes on him for doing? These two people's I-want-to-hit-with-a-hammer meter is rising rather quickly! The Rat is simply encouraging logical discussion over joking, which is to the great approval of Dededes. Rats are innately dangerous creatures due to their nature, but the powers of those who killed Captain Falcon (;_;) are leery of Rats if he is not a member of that foul group. To be frank, I do't take his behavior as a sign of anything other than him being impatient of the joke phase, which is a sentiment I fully sympathetize with.

That new account of Alex's freaking freaked me out, mang. Flowers on heads that drain life and random guys talking to Snake? Oh the confusion.

[Luther Lansfeld]

By the way, I find myself looking up every freaking time I post to see if I'm posting with the right account. OH SHIT AM I GOING TO GET MYSELF MODKILLED? Stupid Anon Mafia. <_<

[Hunter Sopko]

Sounds more like a guilty conscience to me. What kind of person has to look up and be aware at all times? Criminals, thats who. You're not helping yourself at all, Ciato.

[AndrewRogue]

Hrm. Carth's attempt to push into serious business mode isn't that unreasonable, especially since the joke vote phase had begun to peter out and fail. While I'm not really sold on his push (I don't feel the votes that Meeple and Cap'n K put out look that bad) I'm not really feeling a push in his direction at this point. It really looks like a push to get things going to me. Overstated a bit (and definitely to be watched), but not bad enough to vote at this point.

At this point... Nitori! You seem to be seriously misinterpreting what Tom said. What is up with that?

##Unvote: Bardiche
##Vote: Nitori

Ninja Edit: Soppy, do you have any thoughts on the current debate, idly?

[Excal]

I'm going to take a moment to very definatly agree with Yakko and Rat here.  If we're going to have an even semi-reasonable debate, we need to have some kind of structure.  And a large part of that structure will involve heaping our votes on to a smaller number of targets so that we can focus.  Who doesn't matter as much as that it does.  That said, it seems that the pile up on Captain K isn't likely to start just yet, given that we've gotten some new targets to focus on over this.

Andy, I'm afraid I'm a little curious as to how you've seen Nitori as being off base here.  I agree very much with his assessment of Tom's post.  While it's not the overt flavour of his post, Tom has that undertone of you don't do things like that this early off of this little info.  And then doesn't suggest what should be done in this situation.  Simply that Rat's doing it wrong.  And he does focus on it being early in the game.  So, Andy, tell me.  How did you read Tom's post?

Now, for my own pressure vote, I've got no issues with starting the real Day 1 with some heat on the folks who thought it'd be a good idea to attack the guy kickstarting serious discussion for daring to suggest we make life uncomfortable for someone.  Not even that we kill them, just that we start a train and see where it leads.  And since Tom already has a vote...

##Unvote,  ##Vote: Dread Thomas

PS, Sopko.  You mind not just randomly dropping in and making non sequitirs?  If you want to post, then say something about what's going on, or make some real observations, will you?

[EvilTom]

Nitori, and now Excal. I don't see what's so confusing about my post, but since both of you have misinterpreted it:

it's so early in the game and Rat is already suggesting we start a 'train'. ('Instead, I think everyone should pile up on Capn'K.... Get yours in now!'). That kind of train rush tactic has never been pro-town, in my experience.

Now...

...but Tom, in his post, implies that "the game has just begun", and that that is somehow too early for "serious" content. Can I have some clarification on this~?

As you can see, I never said serious discussion was bad. I said that a quicklynch train was a bad idea early in the game.
Nitori, sorry for the confusion if it was unclear.

Excal...

I agree very much with his assessment of Tom's post.  While it's not the overt flavour of his post, Tom has that undertone of you don't do things like that this early off of this little info.

Can you tell me where I've said serious discussion is bad? Because I didn't, I said that quicklynching, based off joke votes, is bad for town.
Or are you just looking for a quicklynch here? Because... you've presented no evidence other than the 'undertone' of my post. What's that supposed to mean? :\
You're trying to start a train on me because my post had a 'tone' of [that we shouldn't have serious discussion], even though it didn't say that in my text? That's absurd.

My question to you: where have I indicated that I'm against serious discussion? (Please don't say 'the vibe' or 'tone' again, use real reasoning).
'cos that's the reason for your vote, right?


Since I'm asking for others to reconsider their misrepresentation of my post, I may as well extend the same to others;
Rat - were you saying we should all jump on and train Captain K? Or were you just saying we should apply pressure? I assumed it was the former, but it seems that some of us are arguing completely different topics here.

[Carthrat]

Re: Dread Thomas

It is, in fact, true that I was not really desirous of a quicklynch on Cap'n K. However, I was desirous of something happening, and starting off the game with a rapid pile of votes on someone is a pretty good way of getting things done. That's what I think a train is (a bunch of votes on one person.)

When I accuse people, I don't like to pull punches and say stuff like "Just a poke to get a response" or "This is just a pressure vote" or whatever. Fuck no! This is HARDCORE MAFIA SERIOUS BUSINESS. I will come out with ALL FISTS SWINGING and SMASH PEOPLES HEADS IN with the FURY of the IKE'S RIDICULOUS SMASH POWERS. I'll give every vote my all! I think it's dumb to try and modulate the 'power' of your votes, because they all have same in-game impact anyway.

I never even *expected* a seriously large train on Cap'n to pick up. SRSBUZINESS is quickstarted by someone taking things seriously, even dumb stuff like jokevotes.

<->

People think you are against serious discussion for attacking me, someone who was encouraging serious discussion. It is not unreasonable to conclude this from your carefree manner that reminds us we have infinite time (hint: we might not, remember Otacon's message?) and these are 'just jokevotes'; because we'll always have infinite time, and all votes will be jokevotes until someone makes one that isn't. You- and bardiche- seemed to mostly criticize me for taking action.

Your latest post seems like it's reaching for information that is plainly obvious; asking people to quote you saying where you've said serious discussion is bad misses the point of their arguments, which is that your posts seem to *imply* a distaste towards taking the game further. Trying to infer what people are really trying to accomplish in their posts is a normal part of the game, and your post seems to reject that here-

You're trying to start a train on me because my post had a 'tone' of [that we shouldn't have serious discussion], even though it didn't say that in my text? That's absurd.

What's absurd is forcing people to take you for face value on what you're saying. That isn't going to happen, never will. Getting all indiginant about it hasn't helped before; why would it start now?

I feel that you're deliberately pretending you don't get stuff- namely my intent with calling for a train on Cap'n and the very concept of reading implied statements in a text- in an attempt to salvage your position.

##Unvote, ##Vote: Dread Thomas

I'm still waiting for Bardiche's response. I'm also with Excal in giving Andy a raised eyebrow wrt his vote for Nitori, for pretty much the same reason.

[Excal]

Nitori, and now Excal. I don't see what's so confusing about my post, but since both of you have misinterpreted it:

it's so early in the game and Rat is already suggesting we start a 'train'. ('Instead, I think everyone should pile up on Capn'K.... Get yours in now!'). That kind of train rush tactic has never been pro-town, in my experience.

Now...

...but Tom, in his post, implies that "the game has just begun", and that that is somehow too early for "serious" content. Can I have some clarification on this~?

As you can see, I never said serious discussion was bad. I said that a quicklynch train was a bad idea early in the game.
Nitori, sorry for the confusion if it was unclear.

Excal...

I agree very much with his assessment of Tom's post.  While it's not the overt flavour of his post, Tom has that undertone of you don't do things like that this early off of this little info.

Can you tell me where I've said serious discussion is bad? Because I didn't, I said that quicklynching, based off joke votes, is bad for town.
Or are you just looking for a quicklynch here? Because... you've presented no evidence other than the 'undertone' of my post. What's that supposed to mean? :\
You're trying to start a train on me because my post had a 'tone' of [that we shouldn't have serious discussion], even though it didn't say that in my text? That's absurd.

My question to you: where have I indicated that I'm against serious discussion? (Please don't say 'the vibe' or 'tone' again, use real reasoning).
'cos that's the reason for your vote, right?


Since I'm asking for others to reconsider their misrepresentation of my post, I may as well extend the same to others;
Rat - were you saying we should all jump on and train Captain K? Or were you just saying we should apply pressure? I assumed it was the former, but it seems that some of us are arguing completely different topics here.

Tom, I don't have a strong enough feel for who is or is not scum yet to give a damn as to whether or not you get lynched.  In fact, just like you, I was very much open in my reasoning as to why I voted for you.  The thing is, I know that what I say on the surface is actually what I mean.  But why should you?  After all, it's the job of scum to say things that sound great on the surface, but have a subtext that will get town to shoot itself in the foot.  And it's the job of town to watch the implications of what they say so that they don't muddy the waters in what they imply even if they don't say it out loud.

Now, moving past the lack of animosity towards you personally, let's move on to how I don't feel I'm actually misrepresenting you.  The basis here is that you claim your post was about how you feel that Rat's methods are scummy.  Now, let's leave aside the fact that you state that as fact when it is a controversial claim with folks agreeing what he did was very much pro-town.  The real strike against you, is in the fact that you are condemning him for taking action, and most importantly, stress that now is no time to pile votes onto a few people, nor do you present any alternative for prompting us into useful discussion.  And it is the lack of alternatives while condemning him for taking action that I take issue with.

Finally, there is a good deal of difference between a train and a lynch.  If Rat were arguing for the lynch, well...  normally I'd be with you.  (The normally refers to this being a screwy game with a Night 0)  However, you can tell he wasn't aiming for a lynch in that he didn't really go for the throat.

[EvilTom]

However, you can tell he wasn't aiming for a lynch in that he didn't really go for the throat.

How can you tell? To Bardiche and myself it obviously looked like he was, we put down votes as such.

And as I type that, I remember that Bardiche hasn't actually said anything since the debate began. I find the sudden absence a bit disconcerting, so I'd like to hear from Bardiche on this. Come on Bardiche, your thoughts and opinions?