I don’t know why you wouldn’t just post the PM in the first place – other than a hypothetical flurry of “oh yeah, that matches mine” responses, what’s to gain? And why would you think that such a flurry of responses would be remotely a good thing for the town?
I’m almost glad I’m already voting on other grounds, because this is nearly in the “too blatant to be scummy” category.
If you are town, you have a day left; you can still use it, and you should.
I can’t be certain, perhaps a vague memory from when I read the OP, or from my previous Mafia playing experience (1 game, which was I think over a year ago).
When I decided I was going to try and flag my towniness to other townies, I wondered if that’s what a “handshake” was. I’d obviously seen the term before, just didn’t know what it was.
Because posting the PM reveals the role. Posting the hash-tag does not.
There are no roles that belong to a lot of people unknown to each other, save vanillas.
Regardless the whole discussion should probably be dropped; it’s both risky, and with the bandwagon on you the way it stands, unnecessarily noise-inducing to boot.
How do you know this?
I stole a copy of Astral’s notes, obviously.
Whatever you’re trying to imply, it’s gone over my head.
Wait… what? Okay, a question now is glaring at me, and I don’t know if you meant to imply what you just implied.
Unfortunately, I can’t think of a way to phrase my question that doesn’t expose something we don’t want exposed to the scum/Lords of Slaughter.
Dang, this is a frustrating game! 
I don’t know, but with you asking about it as well as Kelly, maybe it was somehow unintentionally confusing. What I’m trying to say is:
– when he posted the hash tag, Kelly said there should be a number of players in the game who would get the same one
– hash tags are unique for a given set of sentences
– therefore he’s implying there would be a number of players with the same exact PM as him
That only allows him to have been referring to vanillas. Masons typically know each other, and even when they don’t, he implied a larger number than the usual 2 or 3. (And he ultimately didn’t claim mason, anyway.) No other power role comes in large multiples, in any normal game. (And he ultimately didn’t claim power role, anyway.)
This is all based off his own premises.
So don’t focus on what you think I am implying, just focus on the question:
In this game, how do you know “there are no roles that belong to a lot of people unknown to each other, save vanillas”?
I agree with Normal. There really aren’t many instances where there would be a large number of the same role that didn’t know each other except for Vanilla Town.
Scum will know each other, even if they all share the same role. masons usually know each other. It’s very rare that we have ‘a lot’ of cops, docs, watchers, etc.
I never said there were lots of others sharing my role, all I said was:
Not a slither of a mention of how many.
Fair enough, let me ask you a question. When you asked that, did you at all consider it likely that there would be other duplicate roles aside from vanilla?
I can’t remember thinking how likely it was, but possible, yes, obviously.
None of this rings true for me. You heard the term “handshake” somewhere, but you don’t quite remember where. You quiz Ed about it. You notice that your PM did not match the sample in OP. You quiz the mod about it. He points you to rule number 8 in the OP. And somehow you missed rule #13 in the OP? It was a few after rule number 8 and just above the sample PM. [spoiler]
[/spoiler]
And you thought this handshake attempt was your best defense, in spite of Ed saying that moderators almost always try to prevent handshakes? You obviously put some thought, time, and research into this. It’s a pity you missed rule 13.
Vote: KellyCriterion
Vote Count
KellyCriterion (9): Normal Phase [196], ShadowFacts [203], Stanislaus [204], MentalGuy [217], Choie [247], Silver Jan [285], Scathach [293], special ed [295], TexCat [315]
Askthepizzaguy (3): gnarlycharlie [228]. Koldanar [238], Septimus [248]
Koldanar (1): Askthepizzaguy [225]
Normal Phase (1): KellyCriterion [213],
Silver Jan (1): Red Skeezix [233]
As always, please check for accuracy.
I’m not really kidding. 10 might be a stretch, but, give me 20 minutes and I’ll pull up the ones that I remember.
In my foreign land (I have three of them) voting without justification on day one is considered normal… because justifications on day one are usually quite absurd.
The silly justifications are sometimes so distracting that they attract votes themselves. I’m not used to your system, and I’ll need to see some examples of “properly” justified votes on day one before I can copycat them.
In my minority/outsider opinion, you guys are rigid to the point of being brittle on these points, and I don’t think it serves you well, considering I’ve *also *observed you folks as being more serious and thoughtful players on the whole than I’m used to. Good points and bad.
Although I prefer to lead with my vote, the fear of starting a wagon on someone innocent isn’t a paralyzing factor.
Furthermore, by placing my vote on Koldanar, this puts the question to those who suggest he’s scummy. Now’s their chance to do something about it, unless they didn’t really find him scummy.
Wasn’t a defense. Someone asked what I thought of Kelly so far, and I commented on all of his activity to date. I neither found him especially guilty nor exonerated. There are little things I could pick on, but it is day one.
And if you ask me questions, I will answer in detail. I’m quite verbose in almost everything I do.
I play on forums.totalwar.org/gameroom, Civilization Fanatics Forums/Mafia, and Totalwarcenter.net/Mafia.
We have not met unless you’ve played there.
Greetings. I’m afraid my personality is causing you confusion.
The initial vote placement was to pressure and do something with my vote/generate discussion.
After the discussion, and the responses, I picked on some of those responses and decided that Koldanar didn’t do a very good job convincing me that my vote would be better placed elsewhere.
I would also vote for Septimus, but I’m not done working Koldanar over, and I’m not going to use my second vote unless I think it’s rather important.
I disagree, and that’s probably because I usually participate on boards where people rarely respond to single votes.
I also think that whatever pressure a single vote contains pales in comparison to being the lynch leader and people questioning and actively accusing you. One is far more effective than the other.
Culture clash.
Respectfully disagree, I don’t see it that way. Not in my experience. Now, after some time has passed and their fate seems inevitable, then yeah, the pressure will have no effect.
Just like having reasons or not for ones’ vote, or a case to base it off of, has no bearing on the target’s guilt or not.
Just like logical fallacy in an argument does not mean someone is wrong. It just means they haven’t argued well. [/tangent]
Yet, we insist on having cases, even on day one, where the cases are going to be pretty thin.
If I am interested in pressuring someone, it helps to not be alone in pressuring said person. Otherwise they can (and usually do) ignore me.
Good, then I will take this as a challenge to put into practice my differing ideas and style of play, and we shall see if your way is more effective than mine.
In any case, coming at the scums from two different points of attack is a good idea. I don’t need to see everything your way and vice-versa to work with y’all.
Anyway, I have no idea what Kelly is doing, and I’ll have to read it carefully, only just skimmed to get caught up. But it looks like Kelly has pushed himself over the deep end.
I do hope mafia nervousness caused this, but I’m not optimistic. If there’s something I’ve learned in my hundred or so games, it’s that if there is a big blunder going on that results in a ton of votes, it’s usually a townie who is to blame. This is both true in mathematical terms, as there are more townies in general, but also true in the sense I’m implying; mafia tend to be more in control of themselves, and even their failures are adjusted to make lemonade out of lemons. Examples being pointing fingers at their fellow scums, or acting out in a way that makes things more confusing, or coming up with crazy claims. When you’re going to lose a teammate, you try to get compensation for it somehow. Even the loss is calculated.
Whatever is going on here, it looks quite not-thought-out. People who have no idea what they’re doing are usually innocent.
That’s it pizza, say things that won’t affect the outcome and others will misinterpret and consider scummy. Stay the course. :smack:
Pizza,
first of all, i hope you don’t mind that i call you that because ATPG doesn’t help me associate itself with you and also because i love pizza. 
i also like your concept about pressure votes. i’ve seen sites where Day 1 votes don’t really have much justification although i’ve never played in them. personally, in the sites i’ve played in, we do try to have a reason for Day 1 votes. now, i want to give you the benefit of the doubt. however, i surmised based on your behavior that you are an experienced player and would behave the same way whether town or scum. i believe someone who has played with you has pointed this out.
so while i still get used to your playing style, i will still consider your vote suspicious. i will admit that i’m worried that Kelly has been lynch leader for quite a while with no serious competition. that gives players from other sites pause as well but from my one experience in the Dope, it doesn’t seem to worry people too much.
I am not going to quote askthepizzaguy but I do agree with his last point. I have been able to read the thread at various times today but not post and this latest move by Kelly just does not seem like something that would come from scum. If scum are not allowed to talk privately during the Day (and I don’t think I have seen this stated one way or the other), then I guess it is in the realm of possibility, but I still think rather unlikely.
Unvote KellyCriterion
I still like Scathach’s case on Koldanar better than any other case made or anything I have been able to spot myself.
Vote Koldanar
Askthepizzaguy, none of us are saying that a Day 1 case is going to meet the same standard as, say, a Day 3 case, but we would like to know why you think the person you are voting is more likely to be scum than the other players. I think most of us just feel that if you are not giving a reason for voting for us, then there is really no need for a response. Your vote on Red Skeezix did not gain any traction because there was nothing really there to respond to.
On preview, I see charlie has also replied, but I will just keep this like it is.
[Spoiler]Visions of the Animus
Kagemusha votes me on (essentially) day one. I have already OMGUS’ed Autolycus.
I OMGUS Kagemusha instead, because his wagoning smelled fishier than Autolycus’ bad vote. Kagemusha was scum. Nearly got him lynched, too, but folks thought I was scummy. :rolleyes:
I was OMGUS-happy in this game because it served me so well in a previous game.
Buffyverse Mafia
Classical_hero demands that I explain my vote, and votes for me.
That night, I murder him with my crossbow, and say “allow me to explain my bolt.” I was a vigilante, he was a scumbag.
Cecil XIX votes me for threatening people, something I always do.
I vote Cecil because, Oh Mah Gawd, Uuuuu suck.
And again, because Pizzaguys never forget.
And he was scum.
If memory serves, I went after a whole lot of people who voted for me in that game, and the ones I killed were scum (I killed no townies). The ones I left alive I had alibis for.
Pick your power
Andres votes me after I led the day one lynch on his partner.
I follow up on that the next day and vote him right back.
He dies, and is guilty.
Trouble in Waiting
Woad votes for me on what I think is the critical round.
I return the favor.
Renata also votes me.
Of those voting for me, I conclude that Renata is woad’s partner, and I want them both to die.
They were both mafia.
TWC Vanilla game
Rebel Jeb votes me.
I return the favor the next day.
And he was guilty.[/Spoiler]Okay, that’s 7 in the past year, just off the top of my head. I KNOW there were lots more, but I’d have to dig through more games to find them. I was keeping track at one point, I had a streak going where every game I was townie in, some scumbag voted for me and I returned fire. I didn’t always outlive said scumbag, but it burnt them in the butt lots and lots of times.
It’s besides the point, but I’ve noted that about myself, I’m irresistible scum bait, because for whatever reason, I seem scummy and scums like voting for people who are scummy who aren’t scum. It serves them so well!
Well, here’s the dealio. No one besides Kelly right now has any reason to worry. There’s no reason for the scumbags to make mistakes, or say anything scummy, and, given the lynch is all but decided now, not much reason to keep discussing anything defensive. They can mention how fake someone seems, or illogical, and follow up on future rounds, but for now, they have no motivation to make any errors or defend themselves.
As such, unless the scum is Kelly, they’re now on vacation. The additional votes on Kelly aren’t going to make him any deader. But it will make the discussion a lot more so. Never fear, I’m here. I promise I’ll continue to say things and people will go “huh” and say it is scummy/insightful/logical/illogical/annoying.
While I consider adding more depth to the stated reasons for my votes, I hope folks will consider adding less to already established wagons which will prevail without further votes anyway.
I will do as Romanic has suggested in the past and try not to be intentionally scummy. But I make no promises about incidental scumminess. I will do what I must, Obi-wan.
And call me Pizza or ATPG or Askthepizzaguy, any of those is fine.