Author Topic: Suicide Squad Mafia, Game Over: Number the Dead  (Read 79744 times)

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #275 on: July 05, 2008, 09:17:26 AM »
To make sure it goes through, since tags hate me.

##Unvote: Snow

Tired and want to get back to your earlier post at a previous point, but I'm curious about your particular expectations Meeple. For example, while I will admit that I haven't managed to come back with anything definitive on the five I originally gestured towards (I've been having difficulty getting strong reads on anyone), I am still attempting to do what I can to give some direction to discussion and provide whatever insight I can while I strive to come up with actual cases.

I think you are minimizing what I actually say though, especially in this case. I'm not just saying that Snow's defense never works. I'm saying that, given history in the DL, that particular move on Snow's part renders me relatively sure that he is town. I'm also, fairly flat out saying, that this pattern has also been demonstratably linked to townie lynching. Thus, I'm encouraging that it might well be reasonable, this once, to bite the bullet and not go for the Snow lynch.

Yes, its based a lot in game theory. I'd say it is still, at the least, reasonable content and at least demonstrates that I'm putting in effort to provide SOMETHING to work with, as well as provide direction.

Corwin

  • My Natsuki....
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 370
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #276 on: July 05, 2008, 10:06:24 AM »
-JR: I'll be characteristically blunt, myself, and repeat what I said to Delta day 1: I don't want to waste a vote on someone who can't be bothered to play. Please bow out if that's your intent. Vote remains on you in case it's a lame trick to try and garner sympathy without an actual defense and skirt on by.

-Tai's post with his 'it's okay to be emo in mafia' attitude made me cry.

-Meeple! Fine. I believed I was concise enough, you obviously disagree. Even though this also makes me cry, I will go over the relevant posts again and give you specific quotes/links to underline what I meant. And I can't help but be slightly mean and mention that if even you are having trouble finding the promise I'm claiming you didn't deliver on, it might be a good idea to follow Rat/Ciato/me/other people and try to spend a bit more time thinning your posts down.  >_>

Anyway, the Meeple response and some thoughts on Tai later today. Given our timezones, you guys are probably asleep for the most part anyhow and don't really care about the slight delay.

Strago

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 839
  • Scarfregist
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #277 on: July 05, 2008, 12:47:16 PM »
Okay, thus begins my weekend period of absence during which I shall try quite hard at least to remain caught up, and ideally to post myself a few times. For now, though, I'm keeping my vote on Ashdla because I still have reservations about her and would like to hear if anyone else is sharing them. My second choice is definitely either Snow or Meeple, but I'm not at all sure just yet which one.

Must run. Kisses.

Bardiche

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #278 on: July 05, 2008, 01:48:50 PM »
Hrm, okay, we've progressed a bit.

Quote
Why is it really THAT weird that I defended Shale?

Meeple, in general, I always believe that one should defend himself in Mafia. Others providing your defense indicates that those others feel confident enough about your alignment that they shoot to your defense. This is alright if you are a Mason or something, and you're guaranteed of another's alignment. But in this case, you're defending someone you (likely) have no alignment read on, quite frankly, unless you have some investigative role or are scum. I don't want to hear if you have the former, but that's my explanation for why I take such problem with your defense of Shale.

Even after you were called out on it you remained over-zealous to his defense. A little defending of others is okay (ie: I didn't get that read out of it, how come you hammer on that point so zealously? as a defense) but when you take over the defense... Yeah. Anyway, I'll keep this in the back of my mind.

##UNFoS: Meeple

JR: Can somewhat understand the reaction. I myself am probably guilty of reacting in similar fashion sometime in the past, and cannot say for certain I'll go down in grace in the future. However, for now I am willing to overlook the matter of your attack on me being an uh, over-hasted attack. It is for this reason that I hold reservations towards speaking out, precisely because I am unwilling to submit myself to such gunfire as well. Keeping a close eye on you, but unwilling to support your lynch.

Andrew: Gonna have to second Meeple, reading over your posts. You haven't contributed much yet. Care to change that a little?

Also, I have to say, wading through these walls of text is tiresome, and I'm having trouble finding much to say on anything. I really have to reach out for some of the stuff here: Maybe I'm just not being attentive enough or seeing it. But yeah, I lack clear cases on people because I keep swinging back and forth. If you find me to be lurking a bit, that's my excuse.

Taishyr

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #279 on: July 05, 2008, 02:10:11 PM »
WARNING: This is mostly just pulling up Meeple's long posts re: Rat/EvilTom day 1. This post can be skipped to the end, but I felt this to be the easiest way to address Meeple's request for reference.

Re: Meeple, you did so day 1; here's references.

Rat:
Rat, by claiming you can't vote, isn't that also basically saying "Scum! Leave me alone! I'm useless!" Granted, if you really have no vote power, I don't know what the best course of action is...if you never claim that, people will call you out for never voting, and you'd be forced to Role Claim anyway, so yeah, probably claiming that early is the best option.

Alternatively, Rat's a Jester or whatever that role is called, and he's TRYING to get himself lynched.  Ludicrous claims like "I can't vote" "I'm useless" and the rest of his posts feel like he's trying to make himself stand out as much as possible...

...oh fuck it, I think I'm looking too deep into it.

(There was commentary on EvilTom here, but not the rolefishing I was commenting on; that occurred later.)

But back to Rat...if Rat really can't vote, either...
A. He's lying.  Always a possibility.  Only reason I could see him lying about this is cause he's trying to get lynched...but maybe there is some other weird strategy he's working with.
B. He really can't vote, HOWEVER, he's got some sort of power role that makes him not useless.
C. He's a completely useless player, and was tossed in by the mod just to add to the insanity of the game.

How reasonable these situations are? A...well, can't really say much about that unless we know more of what's going on.
B, there's two possibilities.  Obviously, those are "He knows his Power role" and "Hidden Power Role not revealed to he himself."  I don't expect Rat to claim the former if he does have one this early, for a number of reasons, and obviously, he can't speak for the second.  Telling us he can't vote this early does in fact mean quite a bit. 
C...uh, El-Cid, you're mad if you indeed did do that.

Also...if Rat is in fact lying...he's pulling one heck of a gamble.  Why? By saying he can't Vote, he pretty much has to follow through, and never actually vote the rest of the game.  Should he slip in n actual vote, well, something's obviously up.

For that reason, I'd be willing to more believe B's the case.  C's just silly, but then, maybe I'm underestimating how silly this game is suppose to be, and A puts him in a situation where he has to follow through.


and EvilTom:

Eviltom looks really weird at the moment. Though, another thing sparked up that occurred to me:
Tom is a bomb.  He's trying to dissuade lynching as much as possible cause dying means not only does he die, but the Hammerer dies too (that's how Bombs work, right?  They take out the person who killed them?)  Given the game like this, I so expect a bomb to be SOMEWHERE, though, OOC, do Bombs know they're bombs, or is it usually a hidden a role?

For this reason, I'm a bit worried about Lynching Tom.  Think I agree with Rat that I'd rather go after someone else, and if there's a Vig, request that they go after Tom tonight.  If he's a Jester, he'll not have won.  If he's a bomb...do Bombs work on NKs? I'd like someone to help elaborate that cause I know a role of "you die, lyncher dies too" exists as something we've used before (Monkey in WoT Mafia at least, I think it was?), but unsure of the specifics of how that role usually works.

REGARDLESS, I do feel lynching Tom this early is a bit...dangerous.  Though, his posts don't leave a very good taste in my mouth, and his attempt to explain his "Lynching me is useless" claim...well, if that was your logic, that would be moronic.  EVERYONE has something like that implied around them, the question is...or alternatively, anyone would be willing to say that, since its basically the same as saying "Don't Lynch me, I'm town!"

OK needs to to say something, you know, of actual credit.  However, at the same time...

...

Back to Rat...I stand by my 4 AM rant.  The most likely scenario at the moment is Rat has some sort of power, but at the same time, can't vote.  What that power is, who knows?  Possible he doesn't know either!

If its scumploy...its a very risky strategy.  Scum have only so many votes they can use to screw around with Town.  By making a claim of "I can't vote!" means you more or less have to follow through the entire game, or else the instant you vote, red flags go off, and as such, scum lose one of their limited votes, giving Town better odds.  For this reason, I'm thinking Rat's either Town with some sort of special, SIGNIFICANT role power, OR a 3rd Party with some weird Win condition like "Win if you are NK'd!"
So at the moment, not seeing any logical move for Rat to do that if he's scum.

So end result is Tom's looking bad...but I get the feeling Lynching him is a bad move too.  I propose letting him live the day, and if any Vigs are around, Nightkill him.  Similarly, Docs, don't protect him!

Granted, on a reread, these posts have a bit more content (admittedly trimmed so this is not as big a wall o' text as it may seem) than just the primary digging at roles instead of content/discourse. Still, speculation this deep when the man's already said he isn't saying more? Right. Uh. This just seems to be baiting for more role discussion and less content discussion, which was a lot of what prevailed in day 1. Mrf. The bolded sections are each are statements I feel were just... there to pull out more role discussion re: these two. Am I the only one receiving this impression?

Taishyr

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #280 on: July 05, 2008, 02:11:23 PM »
Quote
-Tai's post with his 'it's okay to be emo in mafia' attitude made me cry.

Now you're getting into the spirit of things! Keep going! Those tears shall lead us to victory! Oh and lean over I need a few for my research. Cataloging and all.

Seriously, though, that wasn't my intent; the intent was to strive and ward off the suicidilynch, though you tend to be exempt from my concerns as I know your preference to avoid such cases out of spite; my preferred tactic, though the emotion I put behind it tends to be apathy and not spite.

Replying to Meeple next post.

Anyways. On a rereading of day 2, I see the reasoning for the offense on Snow more clearly, and it's something for me to bear in mind. I'm not sure I'm as down with him as a lynch idea just yet, and still wouldn't agree with a lynch on the grounds of the suicidamove, but. Corwin's reply to him... mmm. I don't get the "he's rewritten our goals" comment; the goal is to ensure town wins, everyone else loses. Detriments are eliminated, and he was noting Bardiche's role could very well be a detriment. Rest of Cor's reply there, no issue, valid points re: Snow.

Still reading/digesting some. Blah to mountain posts. Blah to contributing to them.

Taishyr

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #281 on: July 05, 2008, 02:12:20 PM »
*replied to Meeple last post.

Was originally going to post that first and Meeplereply second, but decided to do the opposite. Forgot to change that to reflect. Blah. Gonna go puke more now kthx.

Corwin

  • My Natsuki....
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 370
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #282 on: July 05, 2008, 03:16:49 PM »
Tai:

Well, I've covered what I thought of your comments on JR. I don't really get what you mean by avoiding assisted suicide by lynch due to spite, but if you mean that I prefer not to vote people who prefer not to play and would like to see them replaced/modkilled, that would be a yes. On JR's specific case here, I would have to say that if he's giving up wholesale that the latter should happen. If he is NOT, then the case on him is still valid BUT he could always try to work his way through our concerns by providing analysis on other players and generally being useful.

I believed that the likeliest possibility was of Tom lying about something, if you'll go over my posts. It just didn't mean much with regards to his alignment, and he seemed scummy enough to push the lynch ahead. And as with Meeple, I see no way to play if we excuse scummy play with 'oh well they're always like this'. Need I remind you that Tom played as scum as well? If you give him a free pass, how exactly do you intend to catch him? Hope for a cop? It's a social game, we hunt down scumtells. In fact, you did the same with your vote on Meeple today.

On our goals. This strays a bit from the original context, but I wish to further my point there, Tai. There are several detriments to victory, and uncooperative townies can be an impediment to winning. I agree, yes. But if you think someone is a failure of a townie, you can ignore them or go for a replacement/modkill. If you think someone is scum, however, you don't suffer scum to live. The two cases are not the same. We can still win with the rest of the townies working together against scum, but if we start pruning town too much we are playing straight into scum's hands. First and foremost, find and kill scum. Always. That's it. Far, far below it is 'in extreme situations it might sometimes be acceptable to prune town from particularly dangerous and distracting elements'. Only the former actually directly and without fail brings about the town win.


Meeple:

Here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24988#msg24988) he defends his actions by telling us he thought what would seem less scummy and doing it. It's true that our job as town is to avoid getting other townies occupied with false positives on us and not letting scum exploit them... but our number one goal is still to HUNT SCUM. Seriously, does it need repeating? Do people still forget it as the play the game like a survivor and not like a townie? I suppose that if nothing else, this pushes Meeple a bit towards 'town that makes me headdesk' rather than 'scum flailing'. I suppose I'll have to watch and see.

Okay, back to your request for an explanation.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24895#msg24895
Quote
Also, Cor, you still haven't answered my question.  You claimed I haven't made good on what I claimed I would.  Care to, you know, point out specific examples? Simple taking a post, and saying "Meeple didn't do what he claimed later!" doesn't help.  I looked at the specific post and saw something that I did actually follow up on.  Maybe not in the way you wanted, but I did.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24662#msg24662
Quote
Anyway, gonna need to go over and analyze things.  No clue where to start...well, ok, starting with those who interacted with any of the 3 role flips would be a start, but...yeah, this is going to take some time.

That's page 8. Meeple's next post is on page 9. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24756#msg24756) It covers Andrew; specifically, it says:

Quote
I've been looking at Andrew's posts after what Ashdla said, and well...I dunno.

I believe that to be a reference to the post Ashdla made just before Meeple's. As such, Meeple has moved on past the specific analysis he promised on page 8.

Said post also includes a defense from/attack on Ciato, thoughts on OK, and a blurb on Tom and Shale. I believe, however, as this quote from the same post shows, that those are Meeple's general feelings from the game and day 2 stuff.

Quote
I'll need to look over Shale's posts, to see if I actually find something off about him.

He clearly isn't going back to look over what was posted, but promising he would, just as on page 8.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24795#msg24795

This is another Meeple post on page 9. He references Bard and Rat, but the post is really about Ciato. It is supported with quotes so Meeple went back to look those over, at least.

No further Meeple posts occur until my own: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24829#msg24829

Now, I'll recap why anyone should actually care about all this. Do I think that people who don't comb day 1 posts are scum? Well, no, I never said that. Do I think that focusing on a given person while being general at most regarding others is scummy? Well, it certainly isn't helpful to town, but that's a whole new issue.

The issue I brought up was that some people find it easy to make promises of detailed analysis after a given reveal, and then don't deliver. This might allow them to coast and both gain cred as they are there on the scene and act all businesslike with their intent to investigate thoroughly, while not actually forcing them to own up to their own words and invest time and effort in said analysis. And that is something you are likely to see a scum do. Scum lurk, but they must also have the pretense of a presence. This is one of the ways to gain it.

I didn't exactly single out Meeple for this. Also, I find it curious that the two people who did this were Shale and Meeple, given Meeple's strong defense of Shale. It is important circumstantial evidence to keep in mind should one of them flip as scum.

Taishyr

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #283 on: July 05, 2008, 03:48:06 PM »
Quote
Well, I've covered what I thought of your comments on JR. I don't really get what you mean by avoiding assisted suicide by lynch due to spite, but if you mean that I prefer not to vote people who prefer not to play and would like to see them replaced/modkilled, that would be a yes. On JR's specific case here, I would have to say that if he's giving up wholesale that the latter should happen. If he is NOT, then the case on him is still valid BUT he could always try to work his way through our concerns by providing analysis on other players and generally being useful.
Fair enough, that was what my far more flailing statements and more sardonic counter-notes were getting at. Thank you, you sum it up better than I do. Blah. English major needs remedial English classes so he talk more good.

Quote
I believed that the likeliest possibility was of Tom lying about something, if you'll go over my posts. It just didn't mean much with regards to his alignment, and he seemed scummy enough to push the lynch ahead.

Fair enough. That was mainly just a slight joke/bemusement on my part, I forgot to note this. Sincere apologies, though the resulting  comment from you was good to read and so I don't regret saying it myself.

Also, yes, don't suffer scum to live, did I dissent from that by a miswording? Apologies if I did. Also wish more people held that sort of attitude day 1 since it tends to dissolve to "eh lynch the least townie" even if it's more a case of "well he's possibly town but the most scummy looking" without much actual push, from earlier games. I've been kinda eyeing the EvilTom lynch myself, but I'm frankly not sure how much it's worth it to really look it over currently just since it seems rather justified, considering the factors. Mmm. I should check one thing there, but it can wait until I'm not cross-eyed.

He's (Snow) suspicious but not overly so, looking at day 2, and have never seen suicidimoves as 100%= scum moves or even close so that didn't change much for me.

Mrf. Apologies for the disclearness or whatever the term is. Muddiness. There. Sleep now.

Strago

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 839
  • Scarfregist
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #284 on: July 05, 2008, 04:24:35 PM »
Woo, stealing internet from the first-class super-lounge adjacent to me in the train concourse! I am a sexy badass hacker.

Unfrotunately I haven't all that much to add at the moment. I will say that I've thought it over and I actually wasn't really down with lynching Snow... until his re-emergence and apparent interest in getting back into things. Ironically this makes it look even more like a scum ploy to me, and of course the question of "Would scum try to pull one over on us like that?" just leads to an endless WIFOM headache. Dammit. Tai's point that lynches in these situations have -- as far as I can remember -- about a 100% Townie Death return also gives me obvious pause, even though it shouldn't because maybe he's just tricking us bleeeeeeaaaaaargh.

So Ashdla's made a post and leveraged a vote on Meeple. Is it enough to make me stop suspecting her? I'm not sure, yet. First of all I do feel sympathetic to someone's difficulty adjusting to the way me play Mafia here, because we are strange and wordy and get hung up on the weirdest things sometimes. Obviously I don't know how much I want that to affect my judgment, though, because much of Ash's most recent post is just sort of blandly rehashing the game's recent noteworthy events. And even her vote for Meeple seems like more of a tame pressure vote than anything else.

Shit crap my train is boarding have to go.

Taishyr

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #285 on: July 05, 2008, 04:29:07 PM »
Wasn't my point that it was about 100% townie death rate. Just because it was before doesn't mean it's the case now, just means it's not an effective blanket tell. Andrew was the one citing the 100% rate as his reason to be wary of it.

Jo'ou Ranbu

  • Social Justice Steampunk Literature Character
  • New Age Retro Fucking Hipster
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 12988
  • Ah'm tuff fer mah size!
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #286 on: July 05, 2008, 06:14:36 PM »
In all fairness, I can't blame anyone for getting the feeling of WIFOM - I admitted outright can't defend my moves regarding that, it was just about the worst thing I could do, were I town or were I scum (particularly because I've -seen- this kind of play get a person lynched) and lynching me for bad play is perfectly justifiable. But I'm just being perfectly honest, as I've been so far. I was frustrated, not thinking rationally and, if I'm going back into gear, this episode is going to follow me for the entirety of the game. It was kinda liberating, but.

Moving from this drama, what's kind of setting my alarms off in this current game, as a personal bug, is that this day has been a coordinate assault on the Meeple/Shale debacle. I really don't see -what- Meeple is getting from Shale that makes him so suspicious other than "not delivering promised content" (I'll grant, this is a worthy point, but then Meeple is in the same boat, no?). His general patterns are the same, his content providing is fairly typical of his play so far. And, come to think of it, Meeple never really clearly backed up what made him wary about Shale - Corwin did it instead, and is using it as ammo against mainly Meeple (?). This might be because Meeple is a generally easy target in Mafia, want it or not.

This quite frankly feels like a goading pattern, where it starts as a fairly clueless townie vs. townie dispute (in this case, a one-sided dispute) and a third person decides to add fuel to the fire. What's really difficult to swallow at this point is that the initial subject became a bit of... a prop, so it's now mainly Meeple vs. Corwin, and, considering how Meeple tends to be an easy painted target for more malicious gamers, I can't help but think there may be something wrong. I already noted how Corwin's usual defense/aggression game sets off my alarms, and the sheer convenience of the dispute here kinda makes my eyes grow a bit against him. As such:

##VOTE: Corwin 
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> HEY
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> LAGGY
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> UVIET?!??!?!
[01:08] <Laggy> YA!!!!!!!!!1111111111
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> OMG!!!!
[01:08] <Chulianne> No wonder you're small.
[01:08] <TranceHime> cocks
[01:08] <Laggy> .....

Corwin

  • My Natsuki....
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 370
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #287 on: July 05, 2008, 06:42:40 PM »
I don't get it. Now JR's defending Meeple and Shale? On the grounds of the almighty gut, which somehow blames me in a convoluted manner I haven't really understood? The entire second paragraph is unclear to me. Is JR saying Meeple and Shale are accusing each other? And that I'm somehow fanning it?

I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to be goading Shale. I have legitimate questions for him and I'm not the only one. I'm asking those, in the hopes that he could answer them to my satisfaction. While I have repeated my arguments on Meeple and Shale's cases, that was due to a request for clarification, mostly from Meeple and Shale themselves. I don't feel I'm particularly pushing for their lynch. That is because...

...I am pushing for yours. And have ever since I saw your day 2 posts. That hasn't changed. You acted like you were giving up, garnered enough sympathy to get a vote removed off you, and then moved on to, yes, OMGUS me because it doesn't look like much of anything else. I think I'm pretty comfortable with where my vote is, yeah.

Sierra

  • N I G H T M A R E E Y E S
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5135
  • Go get dead, angel face
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #288 on: July 05, 2008, 07:49:59 PM »
Current votecount:

AndrewRogue (1): Meeple
Ashdla (1): Strago
Bardiche (0): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Jo'ou Ranbu (3): Excal, Corwin, Laggy, AndrewRogue
Meeple (3): Elfboy, Ashdla, Taishyr
Shale (0): Taishyr
Strago (1): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu
Taishyr (0): Meeple

With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.

Snow: Please unvote before voting for someone else. >.>

EDIT: Error fixed. Thanks, Meeple.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2008, 12:51:22 AM by El Cideon »

Meeplelard

  • Fire Starter
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5356
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #289 on: July 05, 2008, 09:23:16 PM »
Before I say anything, I feel it is my duty as a player of this game to say this:

NOTE TO THE MOD: The Vote Count is done awkwardly.  You have me listed twice, with 2 separate sets of votes.  The people voting are correct, mind, but if you can, please just merge them into one, so its not misleading regarding where votes are.

Ok, that aside...

Andrew's still not contributing in his posts, I feel. You claim you are trying to do what you can, but...I don't see you really doing all that much to help in the discussion, be it make an actual case on someone else, weigh in on the discussion, etc.  This is part of why my vote is on you, and one of the reasons its staying.  As I said, I also felt your vote on Snow, which you only removed after I brought it up, didn't say really anything.  Others voting Snow have voiced their opinions, brought up cases (do I agree with them? Not entirely, but they're there), admittedly, Excal did it for reasons before Snow's actions, but still, he brought forth a case nonetheless.

You're still talking about game theory more than anything else, I feel.  Again, you can blame RL issues as a reason to not post, but its not an excuse to post stuff with minimal content.

To Bard: Ok, thanks for clarifying why my defense on Shale seemed weird.  It...yeah, I did go overboard, but as I said, I was a bit paranoid that if I wasn't so specific, something would seem off...looks like the complete opposite happened.
...perhaps from now on, I should work on the OPPOSITE of what I think is a good idea, since doing what I think is good tends to backfire horribly <.<;
(obviously, I'm not being serious there.)

To Tai:
First off, the Eviltom thing was cause everyone found his actions weird.  People were wondering if he was a Jester, Zombie, etc. and trying to get himself lynched.  I was merely tossing another idea on the table that Eviltom might be a Bomb, and trying to NOT get lynched for the sake of everyone (or alternatively, a scum bomb, but all this speculation is meaningless now that we know what Tom is.)  I ended it with a mechanics question cause I really don't know how Bombs usually work.  In any event, I wasn't the only one who found Tom's claim of "do not lynch me, it is useless!" weird, and I was trying to find sense in it, and toss something that wasn't considered.  That's all.

Rat...was me thinking out loud.  To clarify, Rat said he couldn't vote.  This naturally is weird since a voteless player is...weird, without a power role.  So I was trying to work some possibilities out. ADMITTEDLY, I didn't get anywhere, just went in a circle, and the analysis kind of ended up being fruitless.

Also, Tai, just cause this is SUICIDE SQUAD doesn't mean you have to be EMO about it! <_< >_>

To Cor:
I took to it cause, well, it felt like you were saying I did something that I didn't.

Also, I'm not saying "don't hunt scum!"  I'm trying to say "Don't jump the gun, and focus on minor details!"  That's what people were doing. Shale's one line...felt like a minor point, and he was getting actual flack (and more or less a vote based entirely on that.) Scum love to attack minor details like that, and watch Town get caught up in it.  I was trying to avoid it.  My issue wasn't that I felt Shale was town, but rather, his actions were being overemphasized.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification in any event.

To Snow:
First off, while I understand your position, outbursts like that never look good.  If you're really feeling frustrated, its best to not say something like that all, and keep it to yourself (and possibly take it out on inanimate objects near bye! <.<; )

Something does stand out to me...unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by this line:

Quote
And, come to think of it, Meeple never really clearly backed up what made him wary about Shale - Corwin did it instead, and is using it as ammo against mainly Meeple (?)

All I said was, I believe, that Shale "was not necessarily a town" after my defense.  I never said I was specifically suspicious.  I am not really getting much of a read on him.  He hasn't done anything to make him look particularly good...but at the same time, hasn't raised any red flags.  My defense, as I keep repeating and I know I sound like a broken record, was cause I felt the cases held on him weren't holding much water and wanted to weigh in on it.

Thinking Cases made on someone = bad =/= you think this person is a townie.  Similarly, saying you aren't trying to paint someone as a townie does not necessarily mean you are suspicious.  Shale's in a pretty grey area overall.

Unfortunately, its hard to really get anywhere when there's a lot of people who are absent this weekend (Damned its timing!)  I'd like to hear from some of them.
[21:39] <+Mega_Mettaur> so Snow...
[21:39] <+Mega_Mettaur> Sonic Chaos
[21:39] <+Hello-NewAgeHipsterDojimaDee> That's -brilliant-.

[17:02] <+Tengu_Man> Raven is a better comic relief PC than A

QuietRain

  • Proven real at last
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 584
    • View Profile
    • My homepage
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #290 on: July 05, 2008, 11:26:26 PM »
Alrighty, today it looks like I'm only going to get in a single post during the day and possibly one more before I crash, so I'm going to try to make it count.

We're a couple days into the Day and I think it's a good time to start getting serious thoughts together on where the real cases are going at the moment because frankly trying to sift through the eight hudred walls of text that have sprung up in the Day are killing me.  So far it seems there are only 2 real cases with any more backing than a single vote: the one on Snow and the one on Meeple.  Each with 3 votes.  What I would like to see is those with outlying votes (ie: not Meeple or Snow) make your cases for consideration or else consider consolidating your votes for a lynch after the Weekend of Dead Time ends.   I'm open to reviewing others' logic, but I'd like to see some cases laid out for such.

The case on Meeple: I'd like to comment on a line from his last post that stood out to me: 'Scum love to attack minor details like that, and watch Town get caught up in it.'  And I won't fault the logic, it's true scum will do that.  HOWever, so will town because frankly it's the little screwups and 'off' things that let us catch scum.  If you define something as a minor matter and then assume anyone attacking it is likely scum pushing their agenda then you ignore the fact that town looks for those things, too, well you've either got blinders on or you're trying to make a case out of what is esentially WIFOM.  I find that this line of thinking worries me more than the case on Snow atm.  Thus, ##Vote Meeple.  His defense of Shale, the inherant difficulty in reading concise arguments in his walls of text tus making it all look like rambling and the line quoted above all add up for me to feel that of all the cases, this one rings closest to me for a possible scum.

Speaking of the case on Snow: I wasn't really feeling much about the case on Snow until the emo post.  His retraction brings my hackles down a notch, though, as I do understand the frustration that builds with this game.  I do consider him a contender for lynch, though, because by his own admission he was flailing around after not being able to defend himself.  Laggy's post on the necessity of being able to defend yourself was right on the money.  If we give a free pass to people who are backed into a corner because they're stressed and don't see a way out, we only invite the use of this tactic for scum to use in future games.

Also, I am looking forward to Tom's post for the Day.  I think there are a lot of things being brought up that I would like to see what he has to say on the matters.
"Soul Meets Soul When Eyes Meet Eyes"

Excal

  • Chibi Terror That Flaps in the Night
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2603
  • Let's Get Adorable
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #291 on: July 06, 2008, 06:22:10 AM »
Blargleargleargleargle...

I don't know whether to be more upset by the fact that there's so many posts to wade through, or that with all the time I've been away there's been so few.  Head hurts, somewhat groggy, and trying to get thoughts together, but I will get something substantive for you guys before I go to sleep tonight.

One thing I can comment on right now though is my agreement with QR.  We need to start focussing on lynching soon.  The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak.  That said, QR, I'm thinking Andy may be a worthwhile addition to the list of folks to consider.  I'll give more concrete reasoning why in my next post.

Dark Holy Elf

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 8161
  • Well-behaved women seldom make history
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #292 on: July 06, 2008, 08:07:33 AM »
Mod: Snow is listed as having voted for Strago, when his current vote is on Corwin.


*kicks himself repeatedly until he posts*

Oh, there we go.

So, very brief review of stuff since my last post (I've been reading, but haven't put together the time to sit down and contribute).

Meeple stuff:

Yeah, the Shale defence is a bit odd, but not unreasonable. It was also a pretty quick reversal, but I have no idea what that means either. I'm having a pretty hard time pinning Meeple down now, but he definitely still bothers me.

Snow stuff:

The breakdown nonsense had me considering a votechange pretty strongly. For all that there's a decent chance he did it as town, I just... can not give him a pass over it. It's frustrating, as intuitively I don't think he's scum, and lynching town is the worst thing we can do. But that kind of defence can't be accepted. Yeah, I'm well aware others have said this, but it's worth restating. Fortunately, Snow seems to have recovered a bit. Not that this makes me unsuspicious of him, but it means I won't be calling for him to quit the game at least.

One thing I would like to see from Snow is an explanation for the Corwin vote (well it's not a vote yet but it's the thought that counts). He comes up with a conspiracy theory for Meeple/Shale being Corwin's creation. I go back and read his post and I... do not see it. Didn't notice it at the time, don't get it now. Definitely would like to see this elaborated on.

While on the subject of outlier votes... Strago->Ash is the only other one still around? Well, Strago admits at the time the vote is pretty vague. I don't especially agree with him anyway, as I've generally found Ash to be communicating thoughts clearly enough, and has taken sides. Regardless, yeah, this isn't really worth considering.

Snow/Meeple/Andrew debate go, unless someone has any brilliant insight soon. Andrew's definitely the #3 choice to me at the moment, but I'll admit one thing I have -not- done since my last post is take a look at his posts, or even go over his new ones closely. So yeah, waiting on Excal.

Vote, for now at least, stays on Meeple. I'm not wholly comfortable with lynching him, nor Snow, but I feel a jump to someone else this late in the day would be to grasp at straws. I've seen nothing to make anyone else look notably scummy since my big post, today.

Erwin Schrödinger will kill you like a cat in a box.
Maybe.

Dark Holy Elf

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 8161
  • Well-behaved women seldom make history
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #293 on: July 06, 2008, 08:08:33 AM »
Oops, disregard the comment to the mod. As you can see later in my post I caught the reason why, but forget to remove the disclaimer. My bad!

Erwin Schrödinger will kill you like a cat in a box.
Maybe.

Excal

  • Chibi Terror That Flaps in the Night
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2603
  • Let's Get Adorable
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #294 on: July 06, 2008, 08:27:40 AM »
Alright, I tried to give it a go and look this stuff over.  But...  I got nothing right now.  My head is too messed up and I need sleep, so I'm gonna sleep.  Tomorrow, first thing, you guys will have my thoughts.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #295 on: July 06, 2008, 10:21:12 AM »
So, any chance of an actual explication on why I'm apparently candidate #3? I've got "has been helping (but apparently in such a way that looks SCUMMY)" and... that's about it really. Because if that's it, we've got other candidates (Ashdla and Bardiche) that you all should be examining with me.

Admittedly, I have mainly been working with game theory and larger problems, but I will freely admit. I'm having issues with analysis this game. Thick games like this, abounding with ridiculous amounts of posting and a number of fairly long posts, I'm finding it much easier to work with game theory until something jumps out at me. For example, Meeple lying through his teeth.

Meeple: Uh. I... did have a case for voting on Snow at the time. He mad an awkward move on Bardiche and professed a peculiar stance on roleclaiming that seemed scummy. Perhaps I wasn't explicit enough in my explanations, but encouraging Bardiche to keep his role a secret, which would likely result in a panic lynch down the line, is not behavior that resounded in a townie manner, you know? So, yeah. I DID explain what my issues with the "Bardiche thing" was. Perhaps I was just not explicit enough, but here it is in plain terms in case you couldn't fathom it.

Furthermore, me removing my vote from him had absolutely NOTHING to do with you, unlike what you imply. Go back and read my post. Seriously. I unvoted Snow because, as it stands at this point, historically, in Mafia, lynches like this have always caught town. Anyone who has gone the self pity route has gotten lynched pretty quick. There is, in this one case, practically zero reason for scum to go this route. As it stands, I'm tired of being forced to lynch town because of this, and was inclined to, this one time, let it slide. THAT'S why I unvoted Snow.

Beyond that, you keep bringing up the idea that I'm using RL as an excuse for my posting content. That's not really a fair assessment of my action. The most I've done is point out the rreasoning behind my day one post pattern, and then clarify to Laggy (who had mistakenly taken it to mean that I wasn't going to be around) that it meant something completely different. In fact, I've never attempted to correlate the actual content of my posts with real life, just the frequency. Which leads me to feel that you are striving to exaggerate you case on me. Which, in my experience, means approximately one thing.

##Vote: Meeple

In case its not clear. First and foremost, I feel that you are exaggerating and purposefully misreading my posts to interpret them in a decidedly unfavorable manner, especially in regards to my votes and unvotes. Further, you continue to rehash something that I'm not actually doing (which is to say, blaming RL for my content, when I simply provided for my day one and correct Laggy regarding what I was saying). Combine this with my earlier misgivings about you and the day one rolefishing, and I've seen enough to finally feel justified in really going after you.

Beyond Meeple at this point... today was a pretty sad day for posting it seems. Aside from the general plea to see more posting from everyone, I also need to, once more, call attention to Ashdla. The last post was pretty good, but material and posts do need to keep coming.

Excal needs the usual chide that we all need for stating: "I'll do it later!" It just leads to bad things in Mafia. Don't do it! <3

NEB, it is kinda weird to point me out as your number three suspect... but then provide no reasoning, openly state you haven't gone back over anything I've done and then state that you're waiting on someone else to do it for you. Relying on the analysis of other people is BAD because it can (and, in the hands of scum, often is) lead you right into traps. Scum will attempt to make things look bad. Rely on your own readings for actual analysis, and then supplement it with what you see from others!

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #296 on: July 06, 2008, 10:42:52 AM »
So its clear, that first paragraph should also contain a reference to claims about my lower than average content, as well.

EvilTom

  • Dread Thomas
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 790
  • G'day mate
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #297 on: July 06, 2008, 10:51:48 AM »
Things are looking grim and end-of-day-ish, so it's time for zombie wisdom!
I'm not seeing 'the Meeple' case. I am seeing the usual general rubbish, flung on Meeple as we've seen many times before, obfuscating real issues. This line of argument against Meeple contains no real substance and is not likely to catch scum. Back and forth, it looks like a massive towny argument, infighting etc. From an objective standpoint, this Meeple Train sucks, stop it. Instead, look at those who have stayed quiet.

Shale, followed by Strago, have been lurking hardcore. Not just today, but yesterday as well. Not just in post-count, but in post content, quality and controversy. Very much following the current  vibes. Lynching Shale (or in the alternative Strago) would not be a bad idea. The chances of them being scum are highest right now. A quicklynch right now on one of these two lurkers would be far more effective than the current course of action against Meeps.

QuietRain providing the courses of lynch both on day 1, and today (6 posts ago) would normally be ok, but I don't like the Meeple vs Snow argument she's set up. It's just like the setup on day 1. It seems like an effective way to force (through suggstion) everyone to vote one way or another, and when the options are 'poor' and 'worse' (as they were on day 1), it doesn't look good. Potential clever scum action. If you find her sus then lynch, but at the very least keep an eye on her suggestions. If scum aren't lurking (as mentioned above), then this is the kind of ploy they might be working.

!!

There's no point replying to me obviously, since I can't post again till tomorrow. But you can follow my suggestions! Or at least debate them.
I'm a confirmed town. I suggest you take a step back as I have done and re-examine your current vote. There's a lot of people voting for Meeps right now, for very little reason. Don't be afraid to change your opinion on Meeple/remove your vote; it will not look scummy, because I'm confirmed town and I'm suggesting it!
Kill a lurker. At least have some substance behind your vote.
*Obviously I have no supercop powers etc. but you all know I'm town, and I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. And I have an objetive standpoint. Obviously I could be wrong, Meeple might turn out to be scum, but such is the way of zombie wisdom!
btw Excal: The cookies were poisoned.
PS. I don't know Dark Holy Elf, Ash, or JuonRanbo/whatever very well, having never played with them before. So I'm unable to get anything special from them. Watch them carefully!

Good luck! I'll be back tomorrow~
This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time.

Carthrat

  • Max Level Arch Priestess
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1260
  • I'm a goddess! I'm really a goddess!
    • View Profile
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #298 on: July 06, 2008, 12:01:59 PM »
Everything Ciato did, Tai is still accountable for. Don't forget that, anyone.

Being an aggro whore is the superior playstyle, which should neatly sum up my opinion on most of Tai's posts.

<->

Jo'ou... man, I have issues with the content of his *rants*; like this -
Quote
I'm going down in flames and I'm going to like it.
This translates, to me, to 'fuck y'all!' and is a way scummier slight than just 'I can't take it anymore! It's bad but you're going to kill me, so whatever, peace out.'

Other stuff he's said... blah. "I was hoping to confuse the aggro players"- why why why why why would you want to do this?! You want the aggro players knowing what the heck they are doing!

He also says he's not suicidal anymore, but then goes 'the point is moot, may as well go lie', which is it, man. Saying the Meeple thing is 'all about the Cor vs. Meeple' seems incredible weird to me, given that a) Cor is voting for Jo'ou, not Meeple, b) Meeple has plenty of detractors at this point.

It's also great if Tai doesn't encourage him. Sure, Tai writes the right things ("we can always kill him later/I wish he hadn't done this") but they're basically offhand comments, buried beneath an excuse to not participate- when this excuse happens to read as 'when he knows people who are playing optimally will savage him'.

It also detracts from the original case against him- which is the important part of 'why lynch him?' here. Just look how Andrew has already unvoted him without referrence to it! If you're going to rethink your argument, rethink all of it.

<->

Still gunning for a Jo'Ou lynch today. The case on Meeple is also fairly strong; I'm not seeing *his* case on Andrew (questioning Bardiche for what he did was perfectly reasonable; and as for Snow, I wouldn't call the vagaries of claiming, necessity to claim, and finding particular claims suspicous 'mechanics'. It may be true that he was a little short, but that did not seem like enough to me.)

Furthermore, if you were going to use 'unhelpful and uninsighful and parroting' as a basis, there's always... SHALE, who, as Dread Thomas pointed out, has done fuckall for most of the game. His last post was a while ago and did not bring out any case on anyone; whatever suspicion he had seemed light at best. He didn't do much on day one either, except parrot and go through obvious stuff. Picking Andy over Shale here is a weird, weird choice.

<->

On DT's post in general- I don't really agree that Strago has been terribly lurky, and he's already given a decent excuse. Shale is something else, as I just went through. I feel that Day 1 and Day 2 are, in fact, different things (only ONE of these days had three people behaving like morons in it), and that you can't very well say 'what QR is doing is usually good, except this time, when it's bad.''
WHAT BENEFITS CAN ONE GET FROM SCIENTOLOGY?

Bardiche

  • Guest
Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)
« Reply #299 on: July 06, 2008, 02:05:02 PM »
So, any chance of an actual explication on why I'm apparently candidate #3? I've got "has been helping (but apparently in such a way that looks SCUMMY)" and... that's about it really. Because if that's it, we've got other candidates (Ashdla and Bardiche) that you all should be examining with me.

This is a bit too ambiguous to me. Are you saying you want to cast a FoS over Ashdla and me, or are you saying that we've acted in a way similar to you?

Reading EvilTom's post, he reveals an interesting theory. Trying to narrow the lynch choices on poor choices would seem like an excellent scum tactic to take away attention from scum itself. The act in itself isn't enough to make me want to lynch someone (not to mention that whether or not the options are poor is up for debate), but the fact we've kind of reached a near-impasse (there's still some stuff going on, but nothing really defined anymore) makes it a little bit excusable.

We're at least 100% sure that EvilTom is a town player, and there's a very likely possibility he's doing his best to win with the town. Clearly, him being dead doesn't mean he's 100% right, but at least we know he says what he does in the best interest of town.

That said, I don't yet know where I want to put my "vote", given that Shale's defense is rather acceptable, and that we were reaching for straws. (I've stressed this continuously) Given this, it suddenly doesn't look so odd there might be a QuietRain + Corwin combination or something, the two who've most been attributing to narrowing down who we want to lynch. Is this the ploy they are doing? IDK. I can't read thoughts.

Reviewing QuietRain's posts... Her speculations about my role makes it feel as paranoia inciting, stressing not once, but twice in consecutive posts that she fears I have a third party role, while not further pursuing the case in all actuality with reviews of my behaviour or what have you.

Another thing that strikes me is that she says it's good we lost Deltaflyer in the night.
Quote
Delta's death: I'm not really sure much can be gotten out of that.  Whether it was a scum hit, a vig hit or a third party kill, it basically boils down to taking out someone who was a distraction at best and a downright impediment to town at worst.
Sorry, it just keeps going to me that someone with such a darn useful role is considered to be good to be lost, especially because

1) We know Day 1 cases are downright annoying and difficult to make.
2) It was a newcomer who wasn't even used to the game: He could've well recovered on Day 2.

Stating downright that it's good we lost a townie is something that makes me a bit wary. Even if they aren't the most helpful members (Look at QuietRain excusing Jo'ou in the latest post, although Jo'ou is considerably much an impediment to us as well with the entire "manic" gig) I think it's still something to be wary of when someone says it's "good" we lost townie.

Generally, after reviewing QuietRain's behaviour due to EvilTom's theory, I've become very wary of this individual.

Should we lynch QuietRain for this? It feels like an entire turn-around, to me, to suddenly abandon our standing cases to pick up an entirely new one. However, I do think QuietRain is suspicious, but the case on her is too minimal to actually support a lynch.

------

As far as between Jo'ou (that's Snow, right?) or Meeple goes... I don't feel strongly for either of the two anymore. If we must choose between the two, I'd go for Jo'ou, who seems to have recovered since then and seems to be pretty glad with the accomplishment the outburst acquired. Not to mention the case she made on me was pretty shoddy, and she was attacked with reason. The only thing that makes me feel a little less wary is that it's human to make mistakes, and possible that Jo'ou was hammering too hard on my case due to some sort of weird mood affection.
However, although Jo'ou seems the better of the choices, I'll make it clear that I will not vote for her, even if I was a regular voter whose power didn't increase with every vote.

Anti-Shale case... Yeah, he's been pretty lurkish. Meeple took over his defense which I feel he should have done himself. I feel he should still do it.

##FoS: Shale

-----

For the record, my FoS record is:
Meeple
Shale