I find it suspect that you went out of your way to draw attention to that statement, then when someone bit, you responded with a contentless/coy answer.
I find it suspect that you went out of your way to draw attention to that statement, then when someone bit, you responded with a contentless/coy answer.
Fair enough. I wanted to point out that there was more behind my statement than just a fancy font while also not saying more than that. So when someone asked me for more, I gave them a contentless/coy answer.
The "OMFG I HATE RANDOMVOTING" Vote Count:
AE (1)– Eco
TMT (1) - PM
EP (1) – Wuffles
SK (1)– Dagger
WOD (1)– NArcher
NA (7) – Rafk, Guardman, Ced, Kpaca, Cyan, AE, WOD,
Rafk (1)– NArcher
Ged (1)– Roja
Kpaca (1)– E_P
CAntripmancer (2)– Ged, Jobie.
Ced (1)– SK
SK (1)– Andelijah
Just For the record: Im kind of notorious or getting stuff wrong on vote counts. if you see anything amiss, lemme know.
@ cyan: I didnt miss your vote, you didnt unvote. RulesRRules
I prefer Magic and Bridge, though mostly I play more video games - DotA, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, and lately I've taken to breaking out the Worms Armageddon.
Dota
Left 4 Dead :):)
Team Fortress 2 :):):)
NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
Hello, everyone. You were mighty busy while I was driving home.
To be more exact, it seems more like someone who has realized he made an error in pointing out NArcher's tells, but then turned around and voted someone else. Later, once his misplay was brought to light by someone else, he decided to cover his ass with a weak FOS.
This only makes sense if NArcher is confirmed as scum, though.
I don't see the sense in going after Cantripmancer first.
No way the NA wagon is good anyway, 7 votes and we're 120 posts in? Pft.
May I remind you of andelijah in Points Mafia, who was likewise busted on a page 1 post?
Your attempt to "too fast" the wagon without actual reason is noted. The trouble with this line of attack is it seems to suggest that the wagon would be totally fine if people sat on their hands for a week and then made exactly the same vote. That's the kind of thing that stalls games, IMO.
NArcher did something voteworthy. He has not done anything yet to convincingly defend himself (quite the reverse). There is nothing wrong with voting for him (quite the reverse).
Yes, Andelijah was 'busted' because of a Page 1 post. But it took more than 2 pages for him to actually get lynched. NA made one questionable post, and 100 posts(approx. later), from the start of the game, had 7 votes. There is no way that is legitimate.
Also, I find it interesting that you have taken this route. Are you asserting that everyone that A)does something voteworthy and B)doesn't defend themself should get lynched? There is a very, very obvious flaw in this logic. NA could simply be bad. The quick compilation of votes against him, with virtually no discussion(other than some rampant barning) is deeply unsettling. I am highly skeptical that he is scum.
Yes, Andelijah was 'busted' because of a Page 1 post. But it took more than 2 pages for him to actually get lynched. NA made one questionable post, and 100 posts(approx. later), from the start of the game, had 7 votes. There is no way that is legitimate.
Also, I find it interesting that you have taken this route. Are you asserting that everyone that A)does something voteworthy and B)doesn't defend themself should get lynched? There is a very, very obvious flaw in this logic. NA could simply be bad. The quick compilation of votes against him, with virtually no discussion(other than some rampant barning) is deeply unsettling. I am highly skeptical that he is scum.
The joking OMGUS vote on RafK doesn't smell like nervousness to me, anyway.
May I remind you of andelijah in Points Mafia, who was likewise busted on a page 1 post?
Your attempt to "too fast" the wagon without actual reason is noted. The trouble with this line of attack is it seems to suggest that the wagon would be totally fine if people sat on their hands for a week and then made exactly the same vote. That's the kind of thing that stalls games, IMO.
NArcher did something voteworthy. He has not done anything yet to convincingly defend himself (quite the reverse). There is nothing wrong with voting for him (quite the reverse).
No, but I think we need to give him a chance to defend himself; because I really want to see how he explains putting a vote on someone who asked quite kindly not to be voted.
Yes, Andelijah was 'busted' because of a Page 1 post. But it took more than 2 pages for him to actually get lynched.
It didn't take that long to get a bunch of votes on him, though. And he SHOULD have been lynched much quicker, absolutely should have.
NA made one questionable post, and 100 posts(approx. later), from the start of the game, had 7 votes. There is no way that is legitimate.
Your failure to actually provide an actual reason NA is not scummy is noted.
Also, I find it interesting that you have taken this route. Are you asserting that everyone that A)does something voteworthy and B)doesn't defend themself should get lynched?
Strawman.
He's not lynched yet.
But anyone who does something scummy and fails to defend themselves is worthy of wagonning at least to the point of claiming, yes.
There is a very, very obvious flaw in this logic. NA could simply be bad.
This could have explained the original vote, but the way he reacted to pressure suggests dishonest rather than bad.
I know newbie vs newbie scum can be a tough call to make, but so far on this one I call newbie scum. Heck, weren't you voting NA yourself a second ago before calling 'too fast"?
The quick compilation of votes against him, with virtually no discussion
Obviously there is not enough to discuss to justify walls of text, but reasons have been given and discussed in pretty good detail given how early in the game it is. I have seen you go with far less discussion on games much further advanced.
No, but I think we need to give him a chance to defend himself; because I really want to see how he explains putting a vote on someone who asked quite kindly not to be voted.
Yes, of course; I am not advocating hammering him right now this second.
Why is it my responsibility to provide a reason he is not scummy? I admit that his two posts were questionable. This can be seen clearly be the fact that I voted him. But the wagon grew too quickly, and that's it. His action(s) were scummy, Yes. But not scummy enough to warrant that many votes in such a short time span, especially when he hasn't had much of a chance to respond.
To whit, I have seen lots of wagons that grew rapidly, particularly early in the game. They are almost always against bad townies. You have ONE example in a sea of millions of a time that the person was actually scum. And even IN that example, the wagon did not gain speed quickly. So frankly, I don't see how it's relevant anyway.
I'm not going to avoid voicing the concerns I have about NArcher's behavior, but I don't feel like it's anywhere vote-worthy as of yet. I'd like to hear more from him, and let him know that I find him suspicious. In the meantime, since my vote isn't placed on anyone, I'm going to have some fun with Kpaca, whose mind is way to fun to mess with. Except that E_P decided he wanted in...
If that is what you believed, why do you have a mocking tone at the end there urging NA not to dig himself deeper in whatever situation he found himself in, by providing a vote count of all things?
"Hi, I'd like to be the last vote of the day. It's in our best interests. But in the meantime I'll put the first vote on a person." I realize that his vote was probably random-stage based, but if he's serious, why wouldn't he indicate his suspicions via non-vote instead?
Because non-votes like FOS and IGMEOY are superficial and pretentious, and avoids a player from being tracked by their votes when a reread is being done. And since I don't subscribe to it, I'm not going to do it. But really, you are not going to penalize me for playing my normal game, would you?
Yes, actually, since I've seen it in games. The person who wants to hammer usually highlights his choice of vote with a placeholder ("I want to hammer, so I won't vote SomeGuy, but I would normally vote him now; please get him to hammer range and I'll hammer him.") instead of voting for that person.
I expressed the desire to have the Hammer Vote every single lynch. And somehow you're certain the person I pick would be lynched every single time? >_>
Funny: tearing me down with compliments. Did Dagger's comment really not strike anyone else as odd? I found it strange, so I called him on it. I wasn't asking about abilities, consequences, etc, but identifying what appeared to me as errant behavior.
Actually, it's fishing, just more of a subtle variant. By expressing disbelief/wonder over consistencies of my request/action/vote so early when it's obvious to anyone who actually look, you could be hoping I would explain/elaborate further on why I would actually need to Hammer Vote. Just saying.
May I remind you of andelijah in Points Mafia, who was likewise busted on a page 1 post?
I would add that said post was tantamount to claiming scum. Miller (which other people actually took) and Extra Life (my biggest mistake. Well, at least it forced two lynches on me) pointed in exactly one direction. Another big difference is that I wasn't exactly a new player there.
Although what bothers me more is actually the lack of speed. The players seemingly wanting to put pressure on Night Archer, but refusing to join the wagon. Yes, fast wagon probably points to noob town, but fast wagon with weak background pushes from certain players points towards the scum.
I would add that said post was tantamount to claiming scum. Miller (which other people actually took) and Extra Life (my biggest mistake. Well, at least it forced two lynches on me) pointed in exactly one direction. Another big difference is that I wasn't exactly a new player there.
Although what bothers me more is actually the lack of speed. The players seemingly wanting to put pressure on Night Archer, but refusing to join the wagon. Yes, fast wagon probably points to noob town, but fast wagon with weak background pushes from certain players points towards the scum.
I'm not following the logic in that second paragraph. Clarify?
I'm not following the logic in that second paragraph. Clarify?
There were 3 FoSes and Shadow Knight fence sitting while Night Archer was at 4-5 votes. Two of those (specifically Shadow Knight and Archmage Eternal) read as an attempt to push the wagon forward without actually appearing on the vote count, or being responsible for any fallout that might occur due to actual pressure or even a lynch.
Eh, I think it's irrelevant whether he would be newb scum or not. It's WIFOM. It all lies upon whether it's scummy action or not. I think there's something there in the situation, if NA is not scum, then surely someone pushing the quick-lynch wagon is, no?
@kpaca: How many games have we played in? I really am trying my best to clearly explain my thought pattern. It is just hard sometimes.
Moving on to the NA case. I find it strange that people are saying that he hasn't had a chance to defend himself. This is a lie. He has had plenty of chances to defend himself, the problem was his defense was either bad or non-existent, and just dug himself a deeper hole. Just because he didn't defend himself doesn't mean he didn't have a chance to.
Also FoS: Shadow Knight for blatant fence-sitting.
Why is it my responsibility to provide a reason he is not scummy? I admit that his two posts were questionable. This can be seen clearly be the fact that I voted him. But the wagon grew too quickly, and that's it. His action(s) were scummy, Yes. But not scummy enough to warrant that many votes in such a short time span, especially when he hasn't had much of a chance to respond.
To whit, I have seen lots of wagons that grew rapidly, particularly early in the game. They are almost always against bad townies. You have ONE example in a sea of millions of a time that the person was actually scum. And even IN that example, the wagon did not gain speed quickly. So frankly, I don't see how it's relevant anyway.
This wagon is bad, and that's it.
I utterly refuse to believe you, of all people, are concerned with wanting people's responses. Remember RurKen mafia? (The game was horribly broken, yes, but still a legitimate example of your playstyle) You led a wagon on me which, after only about 7 hours, had me lynched (if not for AK's highly irregular demand for SB to bold his vote before it counted) without me responding.
And if you are trying clearly to disband a wagon with words such as "this wagon grew too quickly" then yes, you DO have to provide a reason why not, surely?
I got some guy called johhan day 1 almost exactly this way (see post 72).
For every game you can think of where a newb scum gets caught by a bad day 1 post, I can probably find 3 where a newb town gets wagoned the same way. That basically amounts to a null tell, as the distribution becomes nearly equal to the proportion of town and mafia in a game.
For every game you can think of where a newb scum gets caught by a bad day 1 post, I can probably find 3 where a newb town gets wagoned the same way.
Then do so, and make sure it's the same kind of newb wagon- someone doing something scummy almost the first chance they get on day 1, being called on it, and having an insincere reaction.
I suggest finding 6 while you're at it, I'm pretty sure I can find at least 1 other game which backs my version without having to look too hard. And I don't even play games that often with newb scum in them. Maybe I should ask loran or someone else more familiar with the newbie/basic games.
That basically amounts to a null tell, as the distribution becomes nearly equal to the proportion of town and mafia in a game.
It would if you hadn't just invented the statistic so that lined up.
Newbies can do the darnedest things, but in my experience the dividing line is whether or not the scummy act is sincere or not. NA here smells extremely insincere about it. Rather than say whether or not you think it's insincere, you are inventing statistics to give a carte blanche newb card out.
Then do so, and make sure it's the same kind of newb wagon- someone doing something scummy almost the first chance they get on day 1, being called on it, and having an insincere reaction.
I guess I'm going to dispute this portion more than anything else. The conspiracy side of him evidenced in posts 78 and 80 lead me to believe he is at worst neutral, but probably town. No way he's that paranoid with a team.
As for examples, the two on the top of my head were both scum driven are Tales of the Fantastic on Callaway and Kung Fu on Tilde for his godfather speculation. I'll actually look through the rest of my games for town vs town as well, probably some time this weekend. And for what its worth, though, I vaguely remember that around the time I started playing, there were about 5 newb games in a row where the first person to claim was the cop.
I utterly refuse to believe you, of all people, are concerned with wanting people's responses. Remember RurKen mafia? (The game was horribly broken, yes, but still a legitimate example of your playstyle) You led a wagon on me which, after only about 7 hours, had me lynched (if not for AK's highly irregular demand for SB to bold his vote before it counted) without me responding.
And if you are trying clearly to disband a wagon with words such as "this wagon grew too quickly" then yes, you DO have to provide a reason why not, surely?
There is a world of difference between you and some guy that is in like his first game of mafia.
...
Okay, well, there should be at least.
And anyway, the circumstances were *vastly* different in that game. Plus, the game was years ago. I can't believe you're even trying to make that comparison here.
And it's interesting that you're calling me out here, regarding a wagon that you A)aren't on and B)haven't even commented on. Talk about trying to push a wagon from the side.
I guess I'm going to dispute this portion more than anything else. The conspiracy side of him evidenced in posts 78 and 80 lead me to believe he is at worst neutral, but probably town. No way he's that paranoid with a team.
Consider me intrigued. Please elaborate on what the heck you mean by this.
The thing that interests me in 80 is the reference to the Fast Track List summary of this game, which I'd utterly forgotten. Does it weaken the newb card a bit when the player has done his homework like that?
For that matter, if a player professes to believe that maybe there isn't even a mafia yet... doesn't that make it even stranger that they would immediately disbelieve WoD?
What annoys me more than anything here is Rafk and Andel arguing about statistics to decide whether or not something is a tell. Statistics should not be the only basis for whether or not something is a tell. No matter how hard the two of you try, you're not going to come to a consensus on these examples. Let's save us all some pain and just agree that you two could bash your head against the wall until you knock a hole through, but neither of you are going to see eye to eye.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mafia Stats (10-22 Overall) Random Mafia 2 Town MVP '08 MTGS Fantasy Football Overall Champion Best Non-SK Neutral Performance (Individual)
EDBWDP: Crap, I got caught using quick reply and not previewing.
@Rafk: I can understand where a noob can come to the logic NA did in voting WoD. He's assuming that at anytime, anyone could become mafia and therefore WoD's statement can be deemed slightly suspect. I say this because I can see that for a less experienced player, saying "Whenever you vote for me, God kills a kitten, breaks your mother's back, and gimps me" it screams "HOLY **** I'M SCUM!!! VOTE FOR ME!!! RED FLAG!!! RED FLAG!!!". Not to say that this is right, but I can follow this.
@NightArcher: Unless I missed it, how many games have you played in and could you give a link to the 3 most recent?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mafia Stats (10-22 Overall) Random Mafia 2 Town MVP '08 MTGS Fantasy Football Overall Champion Best Non-SK Neutral Performance (Individual)
What annoys me more than anything here is Rafk and Andel arguing about statistics to decide whether or not something is a tell. Statistics should not be the only basis for whether or not something is a tell. No matter how hard the two of you try, you're not going to come to a consensus on these examples. Let's save us all some pain and just agree that you two could bash your head against the wall until you knock a hole through, but neither of you are going to see eye to eye.
Scuse me, but ande is arguing statistics. I am not arguing statistics. I agree that saying something is not a tell based on "statistics" (particularly made up statistics) is not good.
EDBWDP: Crap, I got caught using quick reply and not previewing.
@Rafk: I can understand where a noob can come to the logic NA did in voting WoD. He's assuming that at anytime, anyone could become mafia and therefore WoD's statement can be deemed slightly suspect. I say this because I can see that for a less experienced player, saying "Whenever you vote for me, God kills a kitten, breaks your mother's back, and gimps me" it screams "HOLY **** I'M SCUM!!! VOTE FOR ME!!! RED FLAG!!! RED FLAG!!!". Not to say that this is right, but I can follow this.
@NightArcher: Unless I missed it, how many games have you played in and could you give a link to the 3 most recent?
I've only been in 1 game. newb star wars rogue squadron.
The reason I quoted the entire post was because the other game I've sorta been in was manga mafia, but I replaced out of that day 1. And in that game, there was someone who basically said 'All my investigations will come up mafia, so don't vote me', and when he died, he ended up being mafia. It did strike me off when someone else came up and said 'don't vote me'....
I feel NA is not acting scummy. Bad play yes, but not scummy enough for the incredible wagon speed. I would not be surprised at all to see scum pushing that wagon somewhere.
I prefer Magic and Bridge, though mostly I play more video games - DotA, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, and lately I've taken to breaking out the Worms Armageddon.
*like* Left 4 Dead with Drinking rules is awesome.
No, but I think we need to give him a chance to defend himself; because I really want to see how he explains putting a vote on someone who asked quite kindly not to be voted.
This post to me feels like you really only want to watch him squirm and don't care about his defense.
Moving on to the NA case. I find it strange that people are saying that he hasn't had a chance to defend himself. This is a lie. He has had plenty of chances to defend himself, the problem was his defense was either bad or non-existent, and just dug himself a deeper hole. Just because he didn't defend himself doesn't mean he didn't have a chance to.
Also FoS: Shadow Knight for blatant fence-sitting.
Oh man, I'm agreeing with Guardman...
However the only logical answer I can think of for NA to have and is town is that he's a noob.
I've only been in 1 game. newb star wars rogue squadron.
The reason I quoted the entire post was because the other game I've sorta been in was manga mafia, but I replaced out of that day 1. And in that game, there was someone who basically said 'All my investigations will come up mafia, so don't vote me', and when he died, he ended up being mafia. It did strike me off when someone else came up and said 'don't vote me'....
I'll have to check out the game, did you guys vote for this guy on the first day of the game?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks goes out to DarkNightCavalier and XenoNinja
I've only been in 1 game. newb star wars rogue squadron.
The reason I quoted the entire post was because the other game I've sorta been in was manga mafia, but I replaced out of that day 1. And in that game, there was someone who basically said 'All my investigations will come up mafia, so don't vote me', and when he died, he ended up being mafia. It did strike me off when someone else came up and said 'don't vote me'....
I find this reasoning for your actions over all very weak. For one the circumstances are similar, but not the same. WoD only asked you not to vote for him, plus considering the amount of voting that happens in the random stage I think it is reasonable thing to request, if you have a reason for not wanting to be voted. As for the reason, WoD didn't give it and at this stage in time there is no reason to have it be public.
The person in your example gave the reasoning that all of his investigations come up mafia, so don't vote for me. Right there his reasoning for not wanting to be voted for is suspicious and would require some further investigation. But as to vote for him just because he said that is not only dangerous, but stupid without further investigation to see if it looks like he is telling the truth or it is actually a scum lie.
Therefore, combined with your earlier responses, this reason for your actions doesn't really work for me and seems sort of forced as an excuse for your actions.
And it's interesting that you're calling me out here, regarding a wagon that you A)aren't on and B)haven't even commented on. Talk about trying to push a wagon from the side.
Are you ******** me?
You're right, I didn't comment at all. Apologies.
Quote from me, on page 3 »
On that note, NA, you seem to be acting from a scum mindset here. Voting WoD when he specifically said not to at this stage of the game is at best incredibly stupid and, more likely, an attempt by a newb scum to ice a powerful, yet precipitous ability of a power role.
Was it...Court Mafia where this idea was first used? Bertrand's role? bah, I would re-check if I thought the exact example was relevant but the point is, this is a SPECIALTY. You don't get to say what will and won't be involved with roles in here.
Pseudo-Vote NA, pending a votecount.
I believe here's what your reply should be:
Quote from one of your posts where you"re not reading the first time, with appropriate names changed »
I find this reasoning for your actions over all very weak. For one the circumstances are similar, but not the same. WoD only asked you not to vote for him, plus considering the amount of voting that happens in the random stage I think it is reasonable thing to request, if you have a reason for not wanting to be voted. As for the reason, WoD didn't give it and at this stage in time there is no reason to have it be public.
The person in your example gave the reasoning that all of his investigations come up mafia, so don't vote for me. Right there his reasoning for not wanting to be voted for is suspicious and would require some further investigation. But as to vote for him just because he said that is not only dangerous, but stupid without further investigation to see if it looks like he is telling the truth or it is actually a scum lie.
Therefore, combined with your earlier responses, this reason for your actions doesn't really work for me and seems sort of forced as an excuse for your actions.
Hanlon's Razor. Keep an eye on him, but that's as far as it needs to go this early in the day.
I've only been in 1 game. newb star wars rogue squadron.
The reason I quoted the entire post was because the other game I've sorta been in was manga mafia, but I replaced out of that day 1. And in that game, there was someone who basically said 'All my investigations will come up mafia, so don't vote me', and when he died, he ended up being mafia. It did strike me off when someone else came up and said 'don't vote me'....
Two things bugging me here:
1) This seems like the "safes" question to answer or point to defend. It seems like you are trying to cherry pick which parts of your wagon to defend against which never ends well.
2) The answer also sounds very forced to me. "I am a miller" and "Don't vote for me" really are worlds apart.
I see. You are certain SK will be lynched by the end of day then? In that case, I'll happily unvote, just for you.
No, like I said, it seemed odd. Since I've been instructed that good play is to notice discrepancies and comment on them/question them, I did so.
Quote from Dagger »
If that is what you believed, why do you have a mocking tone at the end there urging NA not to dig himself deeper in whatever situation he found himself in, by providing a vote count of all things?
I didn't feel like I was mocking in tone, and I enjoy keeping independent vote counts; check my other games (they're in my Shed-o-matic).
Quote from Dagger »
Because non-votes like FOS and IGMEOY are superficial and pretentious, and avoids a player from being tracked by their votes when a reread is being done. And since I don't subscribe to it, I'm not going to do it. But really, you are not going to penalize me for playing my normal game, would you?
Never having played with you before, I don't know what your normal game is. But I would never penalize someone for playing their normal game. Unless you're nomally scum.
Quote from Dagger »
I expressed the desire to have the Hammer Vote every single lynch. And somehow you're certain the person I pick would be lynched every single time? >_>
I don't really understand your question. Where did I say or imply that?
Quote from Dagger »
Actually, it's fishing, just more of a subtle variant. By expressing disbelief/wonder over consistencies of my request/action/vote so early when it's obvious to anyone who actually look, you could be hoping I would explain/elaborate further on why I would actually need to Hammer Vote. Just saying.
Someone needs to state the obvious; Guardman's here. (Ba-dump'ch! My apologies, Guardman; I admit that was a cheap shot.) Actually, there've been many times when someone pointed out a post that was obvious to them and I did a double-take because I didn't see it from their point of view. If I see something that I find odd, don't I owe it to the town to highlight it?
The thing that interests me in 80 is the reference to the Fast Track List summary of this game, which I'd utterly forgotten. Does it weaken the newb card a bit when the player has done his homework like that?
For that matter, if a player professes to believe that maybe there isn't even a mafia yet... doesn't that make it even stranger that they would immediately disbelieve WoD?
Doing the homework could just as easily be overeager noobtown, and a town uncertain of whether or not the mafia had been assigned certainly wouldn't be any less paranoid about special requests.
I agree that this is suspicious. Cantrip's making assumptions and trying to present the whole thing with motives, and the question at the end is fishing and looks like he's trying to make the whole incident look sinister.
And you're spinning the conversation to make me look sinister. Ged was obviously trying to attract attention; I asked him a question.
Quote from ced »
Cantrip's still looking shady, and he didn't respond to my previous post either. Coupled with his strange push-the-wagon-yet-was-concerned attitude to the NArcher case, and his questionable responses earlier (particularly that sarcastic one), I'll support either wagon.
Check my last game, Star Wars Rogue Mafia, and you'll see I did the exact same thing with Alexsr because he made a choice that was scummy, but felt like a noob mistake to me. I don't know that the situation with NArcher this game is the same, since NArcher seemed savvier in Rogue Mafia than he's coming off this game, but Alex made a hella lot more bad choices and plays and I never felt that it was enough to warrant the vote. The results proved me right (Alex was noob town making horrible mistakes), although I admit it could just as easily have gone the other way. As to responding to your previous post...
To be honest, I 100% guessed that the speed of the wagon would be a "concern" of yours, and now it turns out that, conveniently, it is.
Of course, I can't read much in the way of concern over the speed of the wagon here:
No, I figured noting the number of votes that had built within the first 65 posts would accomplish my task: to highlight that a wagon had formed and that NArcher was well on his way. I didn't think expressing concern was a necessity.
Quote from Ced »
That's an unneccesarily dismissive response.
It was in response to a redundant statement. Of course I might vote for him later, but I'm not "setting up" anything.
I got some guy called johhan day 1 almost exactly this way (see post 72).
Plz explain how that situation is the same because I don't see it, bra
Quote from Rafffie »
Then do so, and make sure it's the same kind of newb wagon- someone doing something scummy almost the first chance they get on day 1, being called on it, and having an insincere reaction.
Do not understand the "something scummy."
Intent to screww someone up? you think this is more likely them a newb who hasnt seen a role like this before?
A role that doesn't lose votes? Frankly, I can't see that role EVER being town. And if it were, I think that WoD would have told us this when he made his original statement. There is no benefit to playing a role like this close to the vest.
Consider my vote on WoD, though obviously I want to me cautious here
I don't like the RVS, yet everyone gets whiney if I choose not to participate, so I voted ced. It was a joke vote (which I assume HE understood based on quoting me with the rolling eyes).
Then I said I don't like what NightArcher did, and admitted my first reaction was to vote him, but because I don't like the way the wagon developed, I chose not to participate in it.
The 3-5 people who are all FOSing me and citing "fence sitting" are pushing a bandwagon without being on it.
Oh..you're right.
I misread that one. Point retracted.
Fair enough. I wanted to point out that there was more behind my statement than just a fancy font while also not saying more than that. So when someone asked me for more, I gave them a contentless/coy answer.
AE (1)– Eco
TMT (1) - PM
EP (1) – Wuffles
SK (1)– Dagger
WOD (1)– NArcher
NA (7) – Rafk, Guardman, Ced, Kpaca, Cyan, AE, WOD,
Rafk (1)– NArcher
Ged (1)– Roja
Kpaca (1)– E_P
CAntripmancer (2)– Ged, Jobie.
Ced (1)– SK
SK (1)– Andelijah
Just For the record: Im kind of notorious or getting stuff wrong on vote counts. if you see anything amiss, lemme know.
@ cyan: I didnt miss your vote, you didnt unvote. RulesRRules
With 24 Alive, its 12 to lynch
Left 4 Dead :):)
Team Fortress 2 :):):)
NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
No way the NA wagon is good anyway, 7 votes and we're 120 posts in? Pft.
Same here. I tried to figure out RVS and had no idea, and I've figured it out still.
All the same though, my vote still stands for all the other reasons.
@RahltheMODGOD I'm voting for Cantripmancer like 10 posts back.
Random Mafia 2 Town MVP
'08 MTGS Fantasy Football Overall Champion
Best Non-SK Neutral Performance (Individual)
Toldja
This only makes sense if NArcher is confirmed as scum, though.
I don't see the sense in going after Cantripmancer first.
May I remind you of andelijah in Points Mafia, who was likewise busted on a page 1 post?
Your attempt to "too fast" the wagon without actual reason is noted. The trouble with this line of attack is it seems to suggest that the wagon would be totally fine if people sat on their hands for a week and then made exactly the same vote. That's the kind of thing that stalls games, IMO.
NArcher did something voteworthy. He has not done anything yet to convincingly defend himself (quite the reverse). There is nothing wrong with voting for him (quite the reverse).
Also, I find it interesting that you have taken this route. Are you asserting that everyone that A)does something voteworthy and B)doesn't defend themself should get lynched? There is a very, very obvious flaw in this logic. NA could simply be bad. The quick compilation of votes against him, with virtually no discussion(other than some rampant barning) is deeply unsettling. I am highly skeptical that he is scum.
The joking OMGUS vote on RafK doesn't smell like nervousness to me, anyway.
No, but I think we need to give him a chance to defend himself; because I really want to see how he explains putting a vote on someone who asked quite kindly not to be voted.
It didn't take that long to get a bunch of votes on him, though. And he SHOULD have been lynched much quicker, absolutely should have.
Your failure to actually provide an actual reason NA is not scummy is noted.
Strawman.
He's not lynched yet.
But anyone who does something scummy and fails to defend themselves is worthy of wagonning at least to the point of claiming, yes.
This could have explained the original vote, but the way he reacted to pressure suggests dishonest rather than bad.
I know newbie vs newbie scum can be a tough call to make, but so far on this one I call newbie scum. Heck, weren't you voting NA yourself a second ago before calling 'too fast"?
Obviously there is not enough to discuss to justify walls of text, but reasons have been given and discussed in pretty good detail given how early in the game it is. I have seen you go with far less discussion on games much further advanced.
Yes, of course; I am not advocating hammering him right now this second.
To whit, I have seen lots of wagons that grew rapidly, particularly early in the game. They are almost always against bad townies. You have ONE example in a sea of millions of a time that the person was actually scum. And even IN that example, the wagon did not gain speed quickly. So frankly, I don't see how it's relevant anyway.
This wagon is bad, and that's it.
Scum.
I see. You are certain SK will be lynched by the end of day then? In that case, I'll happily unvote, just for you.
If that is what you believed, why do you have a mocking tone at the end there urging NA not to dig himself deeper in whatever situation he found himself in, by providing a vote count of all things?
Because non-votes like FOS and IGMEOY are superficial and pretentious, and avoids a player from being tracked by their votes when a reread is being done. And since I don't subscribe to it, I'm not going to do it. But really, you are not going to penalize me for playing my normal game, would you?
Or he could be a town ignorant of the true mechanics. You have info contrary to that?
I expressed the desire to have the Hammer Vote every single lynch. And somehow you're certain the person I pick would be lynched every single time? >_>
Actually, it's fishing, just more of a subtle variant. By expressing disbelief/wonder over consistencies of my request/action/vote so early when it's obvious to anyone who actually look, you could be hoping I would explain/elaborate further on why I would actually need to Hammer Vote. Just saying.
Cross my heart and hope to die.
Right...
We'll make you an offer you can't refuse.
Hosting: Vista Mafia
Hosted: Intrigue Mafia (Mini), Seance #43 (Basic), Conflux Mafia (Normal), Goo Mafia (FTQ), Experiment #26 (Basic)
Ongoing/Completed - 0/41
Town/Mafia/SK/Survivor - 30/6/4/1
NKed/Lynched/Survived - 15/11/15
Although what bothers me more is actually the lack of speed. The players seemingly wanting to put pressure on Night Archer, but refusing to join the wagon. Yes, fast wagon probably points to noob town, but fast wagon with weak background pushes from certain players points towards the scum.
Salvation Mafia Clan
Mafia Stats
last updated 03/23/11
I'm not following the logic in that second paragraph. Clarify?
Is it reaally that hard to imagine a noob who didnt thin it was that big of a deal to place a single vote?
And how bout someone explain to me whaT the supposed scum intention was? How was the vote actually scummy?
Obv newb town is obv.
VOTE SHADOW KNIGHT for poppin a squat on the fence
[The Family]
Salvation Mafia Clan
Mafia Stats
last updated 03/23/11
No. Anything to say about what he said afterwards?
Intent to screw someone up, obv.
Obv newb scum is obv. Overeager to do something evil first chance he got.
Riiiiiiggghht, newb scum are always super eager to start a fight. :duuh:
RIDICULOUS!!
Show mee a newb scum who EVER came out with something like that 1st post.
THEY DONT
[The Family]
Moving on to the NA case. I find it strange that people are saying that he hasn't had a chance to defend himself. This is a lie. He has had plenty of chances to defend himself, the problem was his defense was either bad or non-existent, and just dug himself a deeper hole. Just because he didn't defend himself doesn't mean he didn't have a chance to.
Also FoS: Shadow Knight for blatant fence-sitting.
Funny you should ask. I had one of my mafiascum games in mind.
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5314&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=50
I got some guy called johhan day 1 almost exactly this way (see post 72).
And if you are trying clearly to disband a wagon with words such as "this wagon grew too quickly" then yes, you DO have to provide a reason why not, surely?
Salvation Mafia Clan
Mafia Stats
last updated 03/23/11
Then do so, and make sure it's the same kind of newb wagon- someone doing something scummy almost the first chance they get on day 1, being called on it, and having an insincere reaction.
I suggest finding 6 while you're at it, I'm pretty sure I can find at least 1 other game which backs my version without having to look too hard. And I don't even play games that often with newb scum in them. Maybe I should ask loran or someone else more familiar with the newbie/basic games.
It would if you hadn't just invented the statistic so that lined up.
Newbies can do the darnedest things, but in my experience the dividing line is whether or not the scummy act is sincere or not. NA here smells extremely insincere about it. Rather than say whether or not you think it's insincere, you are inventing statistics to give a carte blanche newb card out.
As for examples, the two on the top of my head were both scum driven are Tales of the Fantastic on Callaway and Kung Fu on Tilde for his godfather speculation. I'll actually look through the rest of my games for town vs town as well, probably some time this weekend. And for what its worth, though, I vaguely remember that around the time I started playing, there were about 5 newb games in a row where the first person to claim was the cop.
Salvation Mafia Clan
Mafia Stats
last updated 03/23/11
There is a world of difference between you and some guy that is in like his first game of mafia.
...
Okay, well, there should be at least.
And anyway, the circumstances were *vastly* different in that game. Plus, the game was years ago. I can't believe you're even trying to make that comparison here.
And it's interesting that you're calling me out here, regarding a wagon that you A)aren't on and B)haven't even commented on. Talk about trying to push a wagon from the side.
Consider me intrigued. Please elaborate on what the heck you mean by this.
The thing that interests me in 80 is the reference to the Fast Track List summary of this game, which I'd utterly forgotten. Does it weaken the newb card a bit when the player has done his homework like that?
For that matter, if a player professes to believe that maybe there isn't even a mafia yet... doesn't that make it even stranger that they would immediately disbelieve WoD?
Random Mafia 2 Town MVP
'08 MTGS Fantasy Football Overall Champion
Best Non-SK Neutral Performance (Individual)
@Rafk: I can understand where a noob can come to the logic NA did in voting WoD. He's assuming that at anytime, anyone could become mafia and therefore WoD's statement can be deemed slightly suspect. I say this because I can see that for a less experienced player, saying "Whenever you vote for me, God kills a kitten, breaks your mother's back, and gimps me" it screams "HOLY **** I'M SCUM!!! VOTE FOR ME!!! RED FLAG!!! RED FLAG!!!". Not to say that this is right, but I can follow this.
@NightArcher: Unless I missed it, how many games have you played in and could you give a link to the 3 most recent?
Random Mafia 2 Town MVP
'08 MTGS Fantasy Football Overall Champion
Best Non-SK Neutral Performance (Individual)
Scuse me, but ande is arguing statistics. I am not arguing statistics. I agree that saying something is not a tell based on "statistics" (particularly made up statistics) is not good.
I've only been in 1 game. newb star wars rogue squadron.
The reason I quoted the entire post was because the other game I've sorta been in was manga mafia, but I replaced out of that day 1. And in that game, there was someone who basically said 'All my investigations will come up mafia, so don't vote me', and when he died, he ended up being mafia. It did strike me off when someone else came up and said 'don't vote me'....
no, it was a joke. I stayed up for 3 hours to get that first
----
*like* Left 4 Dead with Drinking rules is awesome.
I want more answers out of him.
This post to me feels like you really only want to watch him squirm and don't care about his defense.
Oh man, I'm agreeing with Guardman...
However the only logical answer I can think of for NA to have and is town is that he's a noob.
I'll have to check out the game, did you guys vote for this guy on the first day of the game?
I find this reasoning for your actions over all very weak. For one the circumstances are similar, but not the same. WoD only asked you not to vote for him, plus considering the amount of voting that happens in the random stage I think it is reasonable thing to request, if you have a reason for not wanting to be voted. As for the reason, WoD didn't give it and at this stage in time there is no reason to have it be public.
The person in your example gave the reasoning that all of his investigations come up mafia, so don't vote for me. Right there his reasoning for not wanting to be voted for is suspicious and would require some further investigation. But as to vote for him just because he said that is not only dangerous, but stupid without further investigation to see if it looks like he is telling the truth or it is actually a scum lie.
Therefore, combined with your earlier responses, this reason for your actions doesn't really work for me and seems sort of forced as an excuse for your actions.
Why does everyone always act so surprised when they agree with me?
You're right, I didn't comment at all. Apologies.
I believe here's what your reply should be:
Hanlon's Razor. Keep an eye on him, but that's as far as it needs to go this early in the day.
Unvote TMT
Two things bugging me here:
1) This seems like the "safes" question to answer or point to defend. It seems like you are trying to cherry pick which parts of your wagon to defend against which never ends well.
2) The answer also sounds very forced to me. "I am a miller" and "Don't vote for me" really are worlds apart.
No, he was killed night 1.
I didn't feel like I was mocking in tone, and I enjoy keeping independent vote counts; check my other games (they're in my Shed-o-matic).
Never having played with you before, I don't know what your normal game is. But I would never penalize someone for playing their normal game. Unless you're nomally scum.
I don't really understand your question. Where did I say or imply that?
Someone needs to state the obvious; Guardman's here. (Ba-dump'ch! My apologies, Guardman; I admit that was a cheap shot.) Actually, there've been many times when someone pointed out a post that was obvious to them and I did a double-take because I didn't see it from their point of view. If I see something that I find odd, don't I owe it to the town to highlight it?
Doing the homework could just as easily be overeager noobtown, and a town uncertain of whether or not the mafia had been assigned certainly wouldn't be any less paranoid about special requests.
And you're spinning the conversation to make me look sinister. Ged was obviously trying to attract attention; I asked him a question.
Check my last game, Star Wars Rogue Mafia, and you'll see I did the exact same thing with Alexsr because he made a choice that was scummy, but felt like a noob mistake to me. I don't know that the situation with NArcher this game is the same, since NArcher seemed savvier in Rogue Mafia than he's coming off this game, but Alex made a hella lot more bad choices and plays and I never felt that it was enough to warrant the vote. The results proved me right (Alex was noob town making horrible mistakes), although I admit it could just as easily have gone the other way. As to responding to your previous post...
No, I figured noting the number of votes that had built within the first 65 posts would accomplish my task: to highlight that a wagon had formed and that NArcher was well on his way. I didn't think expressing concern was a necessity.
It was in response to a redundant statement. Of course I might vote for him later, but I'm not "setting up" anything.
Dare I ask: What's Hanlon's Razor?
Do not understand the "something scummy."
Intent to screww someone up? you think this is more likely them a newb who hasnt seen a role like this before?
[The Family]
Nice strawman.
Also, NA's answer certainly helps put everything into perspective. If I was in his shoes, I would probably have reacted the same way.
I asked stormblind about the fact that he has me voting for both Wrath of Dog and Rafaelk, and he said the vote count was correct.....
That leads me to believe that votes on Wrath of Dog don't go away when you unvote.
Thought I would share with everyone.
Consider my vote on WoD, though obviously I want to me cautious here
I don't like the RVS, yet everyone gets whiney if I choose not to participate, so I voted ced. It was a joke vote (which I assume HE understood based on quoting me with the rolling eyes).
Then I said I don't like what NightArcher did, and admitted my first reaction was to vote him, but because I don't like the way the wagon developed, I chose not to participate in it.
The 3-5 people who are all FOSing me and citing "fence sitting" are pushing a bandwagon without being on it.