I don’t know that it’s a big deal, but I hate being misinterpreted, especially in Mafia…
ShadowFacts, you wrapped up your last post with this summary:
I didn’t even come remotely close to coming out “guns blazing”. I said that anyone traveling was immune to lynching (at that time), so that “is one reason to be suspicious of a person who does a lot of traveling.”
Saying that there exists a reason to be suspicious of someone who “does a lot of traveling” is not even in the same ballpark as saying “lynch all travelers”. I realize you qualified your statement, but you still associated my name with that idea, and I do not wish to have that association made.
I agree with you and was not trying to make that association. I don’t think anyone has come out and said “lynch all travelers,” which was the point I was trying to make.
Well, letsee. Who’s traveling right now? Oh, I know! Me. I start out the game by traveling, apparently. So pardon me if someone (and you were the first person to say anything along these lines) saying “I will vote for anyone traveling” will raise my hackles since I started out traveling against my will.
So, automatically, I’m going to be/get defensive regarding you, in particular.
You then go on to talk about the sample PMs and how vanilla couldn’t travel. Yes, you did say, later on in that same post, that it COULD not be the case.
And me, I was telling you, in my first post to you, what the facts were. That yes, some vanilla’s CAN travel and that just because someone is a Dual Citizen doesn’t mean they can’t be vanilla too.
So what am I missing here? :dubious: You seem awfully defensive here over a whole lot of nothing.
And, for the record, I didn’t call anyone names. I said what you were doing seemed foolhardy. That’s not the same as calling you a fool. I’m talking about your actions/posts…not you yourself.
Post 84 - His first post strikes me as exceptionally fluffy - He says something to the effect of “I was gonna look for this, but it turns out I can’t! So I guess it’s back to the usual reasonless votes and speculation!”
My problem with this is three-fold. First, it’s a meaningless post. Second, it seems to be screaming “Hey look how town I am!” Third, I did the exact same thing as scum in LOTR mafia.
Post 130 - Like NAF, I don’t like his totally null comments on Baffle. But what troubles me more is his talk about Wolverine.
Something about the phrasing of this doesn’t sit right with me. I know it’s impossible to defend against me saying it feels off and somewhat scummy when it’s a relatively innocuous statement. I think it’s your added “Could’ve been a townie terrible idea, though.” I’m finding it difficult to elaborate on why this strikes me as scummy. It just screams “Look what a helpful and open-minded townie I am!” Does this sentence seem just a tiny bit scummy to anyone else? I might be reading too much into this.
I"m still deciding if this is enough to vote for you.
Totally unrelated note: with all the talk about claiming who can travel and who can’t, there’s something we need to remember:
A stalemate is also possible. If we reveal all of our travelers, a losing scum team could conceivably force a stalemate by killing our travelers, thus preventing us from switching sides to lynch them. That would suggest to me that we want to keep our travelers somewhat secret, against that possibility.
This is a good point. Pleonast hasn’t redeemed himself in my eyes – and since I don’t know when the day is going to end, I want to get this out there in time.
[Not bleaching sorry. I want it to be clear these were questions to the mod.]
These 2 questions seems out of place, specially the 2nd one which doesn’t make sense after sacher’s answer to the first one. I’m getting a scum feeling here because this might be an attempt to look Town, as in a scum wouldn’t ask this type of stuff right?
The big problem for scums on day 1 is to find a vote that will not look suspicious, and attacking someone who’s talking about a mass claim is a good opportunity. Baffle also does not place a vote on Pleonast, which is in my eyes a plus toward him being scum. Uncertainty - maybe he’s testing the field to see how players will react, or maybe he’s giving himself a reason to vote for Pleonast later (and he just did, see the above post).
Insisting again (like the 2 questions about fake PMs to sacher). Bold part in the last quote is what’s pinging my scum radar. He says this has yet to be mentioned but he already did it. Feels like a way to appear helpful by pushing the idea that some scum might not be able to travel. Feels like he’s trying too hard. This one is hard to put into words, might fall in the hunch category.
And the vote on Pleonast is too suspicious. Pleo claimed being an Attache who will automatically travel at every opportunity, and Baffle never spoke about that. If someone claims, taking his claim into consideration is kinda mandatory when you vote for him, yet Baffle didn’t. In all his posts, he never brushed the subject. His argument, I believe, is only that Pleonast talked about mass claiming. Ignoring a claim when voting for someone is not something a Town player should do.
You can consider the last point my main argument against Baffle.
@Baffle: What do you think of Pleonast’s claim? You must have an opinion since you are voting for him.
I think it’s really ironic that you are calling me defensive, since that is exactly how I think you’ve reacted to me from the get go. Let me sum up how I see that opening exchange:
Me: At first I thought travelers were suspicious since I thought Vanilla cannot travel, but upon clarification from the mod it is clear that travelers are not suspicious.
You: You’re wrong, travel is not suspicious because I am vanilla and can travel. Claim.
I feel like I’ve then spent the rest of this game having to explain and re-explain and re-explain that same damn post, which you misinterpreted from the get go, when we actually agree about the issue. It’s a little surreal.
Speaking of which:
I’m sorry, but this is total crap. That post is decidedly not fluff, it is a basic analysis of a game mechanic that comes to a solid conclusion: travel is a null tell. How is that fluff? It’s so weird - every time I try to explain my thought processes (i.e. “this is what I am thinking and this is how I came to that conclusion”), people accuse me of waffling, playing both sides, or posting fluff.
re: Wolverine - see my response already to NAF1138 earlier.
I wanted to clarify if scum were getting fake PMs. Since I don’t have an answer either way, my mod questions really didn’t help. But even if the mod’s not providing fakes, Pleonast could easily enough write his own. Especially since he wrote one that gives him a free pass for travelling. (Perhaps he’s a scum that is forced to travel.) In short, the existence of a claim is meaningless.
My main argument against Pleonast is his elevation of minor scraps of contrary evidence to certainty, in the tone of his posts. Calling out a scum based on his tone is an ephemeral argument, but it’s the closest thing I can get to a good one on Day One. Yes, the mass claim argument was what first started my suspicion, but more has come behind it.
I know that nobody wants my support (through self-inflicted stupidity), but
**
vote Baffle**
Besides the many reasons listed above, in my offline experiences scum survive longer if in the early part of the game they are not seen as united or linked. If Baffle is scum, then fellow scum should either take up the opposite side of the argument or stay quiet. Baffle had almost no support (or at least no direct support that I could find) which I would not expect if he were town and Pleonast was scum. Pleonast had several supporters (NAF1138 #101 before Baffle’s attack post #107, Rin Twisted #109 directly after Baffle’s post, both of them later #142-144, and others) which weakens the idea that Pleonast is scum. Unless all 3 of them on Pleonast’s side are scum which to me is not the usual strategy.
If both Baffle and Pleonast are town, then my line of reasoning is screwed. Scum could pick any side and screw the other.
You: I’m going to start by voting for anyone traveling! [Your exact words]
Me: [who’s traveling without having a choice] Hey, waitaminute, now that’s not fair…
I think it’s mighty disingenuous that ShadowFacts is saying that nobody was coming out guns-a-blazing to lynch travelers, when his own post was the main one I was looking at when I made that statement. There were a lot of people who were expressing suspicion of travelers out of the gate in this game. Whether or not they actually would have followed it up with a vote was irrelevant in the overall point I was trying to make, which is that given the suspicion many people expressed regarding travel, I’d expect Scum (and really, pretty much everyone, actually) to lay low and not do it unless forced to by their role or outside forces.
vote ShadowFacts. I see his actions here as trying to talk out both sides of his mouth. To honestly try to argue that nobody wanted to lynch travelers when one of his first posts in this game was expressing that his initial thoughts were to vote for travelers is quite squirrely.
We’re gonna have to agree to disagree. I consider it fluff because the end result is nothing. Finishing your thoughts with “well I guess I have to make reasonless votes and crazy speculation” is not a well-reasoned argument. Plus, and I admit I’m playing from a gut feeling here, it’s nearly identical in tone and meaning to a post I made as scum in LOTR Mafia. My goal with that post was to seem like a helpful townie.
The start of your post made me actually laugh out loud, something I rarely do when I’m sitting in front of my computer.
Second, your reasoning strikes me as perfectly sound, even if it might not be the case. I just wanted you to know that your vote makes sense to me.
Wrong. That is the exact opposite of what I said. I can’t believe I have to post it again but here it is. Please read beyond the first sentence, and maybe you’ll get it this time. I’ll put some helpful colors in for you.
To make is even clearer for you (again): I was originally planning to vote for someone traveling, but after getting more information, that doesn’t make sense, so I’m not going to do it. It’s extremely obvious what I am saying there, despite your repeated attempts to make it seem otherwise.
And I find it disingenuous of you to completely ignore my previous response to you, in which I quoted every instance in the game to date of someone talking about travel, in an effort to find someone “guns blazing” to lynch travelers. I still haven’t found it, and apparently neither have you, since you haven’t addressed it. I found two total posts expressing suspicion of travelers, one of them pretty weak (as Plankton discussed earlier). Where is all the suspicion? You keep saying it’s there, but have offered no evidence, unlike me.
In addition, I don’t know how many times I have to say it, but my first post was saying the opposite of what you are accusing me of. See the post above, and maybe you’ll see that you are wrong. It’s probably too much to ask for an apology
It’s also possible that a scummy Pleonast is being defended by townies who have bought into his argument. Perhaps the scum are actually all involved in the Shadowfacts / Idle Thoughts debate and ignoring us entirely.
I’ve just completed a second read, and need to digest what I’ve read before coming to a decision on who to vote for (besides, we’ve got a little time yet - something under 48 hours (as distinct from the twelve Hours of the Day).
One thing I would like to weigh in on is this; I am leaning in favour of the mass claim of travel powers, if only slightly. Developing this information may help us to detect unusual events when they happen and alert us to Untoward Things.
For example, if at +24:00 Rin Twisted departs for Wellington, we don’t know whether he decided to off his own bat or was forced to by some outside agency. However, if NAF were on that plane, we would know something hinky was going on; NAF has claimed he cannot travel, so either he’s shown to be a liar, or some other power role has acted on him and allowed/forced him to travel. But, absent the information that NAF cannot travel, we have no reason to suppose anything is going on.
Similarly, if Pleo doesn’t leave for Wellington, we need to grill him over the discrepancy between his claim and his actions.
A stalemate is also possible. If we reveal all of our travelers, a losing scum team could conceivably force a stalemate by killing our travelers, thus preventing us from switching sides to lynch them. That would suggest to me that we want to keep our travelers somewhat secret, against that possibility.
I pointed that out earlier, but it was inside a big mess of a post so I’m thinking you missed it. I’m not suggesting we should never claim traveler or non-traveler, but I’d like to see some quality discussion weighing the costs and benefits of doing so. After all, we can’t undo it. So far, I’ve just seen a lot of “well, it might help?” from people.
Second point: I don’t see the benefit of forcing people to choose between traveler and non-traveler. We don’t know how many of each there is, so there’s no benefit to lying about it. Scum can be 100% honest and we’re no closer to catching them. However, scum gain plenty from knowing who our travelers are. Consider further that it’s likely some of our power roles are travelers, and I’m not seeing the benefit.
I feel like I’ve then spent the rest of this game having to explain and re-explain and re-explain that same damn post, which you misinterpreted from the get go, when we actually agree about the issue. It’s a little surreal.
