Random Mafia

OK. There were two points there. Or there were supposed to be, at any rate. So the two halves of that post weren’t supposed to fit together into any larger theme. They were:

One: I think Oredigger was wrong when he said Meeko made a slip, and wrong that it was ignored.

Two: I think it is interesting that there has been so much commentary to the effect that “Wow, I can’t believe so many people are voting for Wanderers just for pointing out a spelling error,” when in fact only one person really did that.

And looking at it again, it still does bug me. Just for everyone else’s sake the post by Oredigger that triggered each of those two responses was:

and I still don’t see how any of that holds up. OAOW didn’t get so many votes for pointing out a spelling error, and Meeko does not appear to have dropped any PIS, and in any event, didn’t get a pass. I suppose, in a word, the objection seemed manufactured.

As I said, I have a lot of trouble finding you at fault for it, but peeker wanted to know if his posts were clear about why he thought you were scummy. And he thought you were scummy because you said he was too cagey about his role and parenthetical, which he felt was a misrepresentation because he had come out and said “I am the wicked witch of the west.” I was just saying, yeah, I can see that.

Wasn’t intended as a smudge, and I’m not holding it against you personally because

my bad. it was a reference to another game.

and i didn’t really say anything. it was more like typed out. so please be clear, i don’t have a mechanism to say (which implies vocalization that would entail sound) but merely typing which really only makes sound at my keyboard. please be clearer in the future. don’t want to confuse anyone dontyaknow.

Snipped.

Jimmy, who are you saying is manufacturing objections here?

Does that person ping and or cause you to FOS and or Vote theM

I meant Oredigger’s objection – the one in the part of his post that I quoted. But no, no vote; just a thing I noticed. Oredigger’s response was good enough for me as far as my immediate attention.

Quoth Tom Scud:

I’m not special ed, but the way I see it is something like this:

Scum peeker really did get the role Wicked Witch of the West, fictional
Having not talked with any other Scum yet, he doesn’t know if all of the Scum are evil characters, or possibly if they’re all fictional. So he doesn’t want to claim Wicked Witch.
But he also doesn’t want to make a false role claim, if he can avoid it. For all he knows, there’s a power role out there who can determine what someone’s character name is, or something.
And he also wants to try to get credibility from claiming early.

So, he digs up that YouTube video, and posts it. After other folks have claimed someone “evil” (Benedict Arnold) and someone fictional (Patrocles et al), he decides it’s safe to finally claim, and points to that video as evidence. If things had fallen out differently, he would have instead just took the risk and made up a name, and ignored the video post.

And I think I said something of this sort already, though not in as great of detail.
Oh, by the way, my participation might be a bit low for a while. This game and Diablo II (which just got a new patch) are currently competing for my free time.

/snipped

@ Chronos, this makes sense and is actually quite plausible. The alternative could be that he attempted to subtlely breadcrumb his character in #153, got no response, and so in #174 clarified that he had claimed earlier. This is the reading I got when I first read through the events of the day and it wouldn’t be the first time Peeker tried to communicate through youtube (he used a Spongebob video in Screamers to infer that he’d been blocked). I didn’t see this action as particularly anti-town or pro-scum based on my interpretation of the events but I can see your interpretation too.

As an aside, while looking for the Spongebob video reference in Screamers though, I came across another video directed at me:

(Another video from the Wizard of Oz). Now this makes me wonder if his post #153 really just was a response to Zeriel and has nothing to do with his character in this game.

storyteller (0): [del]peekercpa 116 201[/del]

peekercpa (2): [del]Zeriel 151 190[/del], [del]TexCat 314 356[/del], Chronos 360, Meeko 383

NAF1138 (0): [del]One And Only Wanderers 179 288[/del], [del]KellyCriterion 242 244[/del]

One And Only Wanderers (1): [del]Chronos 180 360[/del], Jimmy Chitwood 184, [del]Meeko 220 291[/del]

Mahaloth (0): [del]Meeko 291 298[/del]

KellyCriterion (1): NAF1138 313

TexCat (3): Red Skeezix 316, Tom Scud 328, TexCat 356

Oredigger77 (1): Drain Bead 347

Red Skeezix (2): TexCat 356, Freudian Slit 364

Chronos (2): storyteller0910 416, peekercpa 450

TexCat did not vote for herself

1.Ok I just found it a bit confusing. Thanks for clarifying.

2.I’m not sure if I should vote Digger for it.
2b.I won’t.

3.I had no PIS. I guess the only way to prove this is on death confirm.
3b.Don’t want my death to be premature
3c.So I won’t throw a vote around this. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Gonna drop the outline for a second :

As always, I come up with better words later.

One and Only’s vote on NAF::

I just figured out why I hated that vote. We play mafia to single out a player based on their actions, and interactions with other players. **In effect, Mafia only “works” when a scum player shows us that he or she is worthy [if you will] of a vote. **

The vote on NAF was not based on anything he did. There was no action or interaction that NAF did, that proved him worthy of the vote.

Because of that, there can be no defense.

And the kicker: As was pointed out with my claim, the “reason” to vote NAF was duplicated on to mine. I don’t think it a good vote at all, when you can transfer a vote, 100%, between two different players.

Let me put it another way:

If there is no reason to vote NAF over Meeko, OR if there is no reason to vote Meeko over NAF, you should not be voting for either*.

[Obviously, you can expand this example, names were used for the convenience, as was seen earlier in this game.]

*I would bet that Scum have demonstrated a counter to this rationale in one game. Not sure if I was present in that game. I would still think it would prove to be the exception, not the rule.

Outline back on:

5.This isn’t my first Rodeo. Let me address a few things because of that.
5b.Yes, unfortunately you guys are going to still think me to be scum
5c.I really can’t help that, if you still think that. I won’t try. Definition of insanity.

  1. I’m not liking my vote on Peeker currently.
    6b.Day ends Thursday evening, correct?
    6c.Still have time for alternatives. Could still go with Peeker.

7.Would be lying if I said One and Only was not on my radar for Revote.

Yes. Yes she did! :smack:

storyteller (0): [del]peekercpa 116 201[/del]

peekercpa (2): [del]Zeriel 151 190[/del], [del]TexCat 314 356[/del], Chronos 360, Meeko 383

NAF1138 (0): [del]One And Only Wanderers 179 288[/del], [del]KellyCriterion 242 244[/del]

One And Only Wanderers (1): [del]Chronos 180 360[/del], Jimmy Chitwood 184, [del]Meeko 220 291[/del]

Mahaloth (0): [del]Meeko 291 298[/del]

KellyCriterion (1): NAF1138 313

TexCat (2): Red Skeezix 316, Tom Scud 328, [del]peekercpa 346 450[/del]

Oredigger77 (1): Drain Bead 347

Red Skeezix (2): TexCat 356, Freudian Slit 364

Chronos (2): storyteller0910 416, peekercpa 450

When are we ending Day? Tomorrow at two?

Okay.

see this is why.

chronos is scum or misguided townie. if you do lynch my rear, when i flip town a couple of positive things can happen. first, chronos is scum and a one for one is a town gain, yippee. secondly, and maybe this has actually the best long term benefit for this and future games. he is town and he and others realize that their approach to the game is, if not flawed, at least not the only way to play and that by pigeon holing certain folks for the way the play is really really counter productive.

i, early on, always wanted to lynch coca cola and bill because of the way they played. tg, i grew out of that because they, imho, are as contributory as the rest of the gang - unless bill’s been drinking and then he gets a little prickly.

so i am actually pretty durn cool with the whole situation.

i like to be right but will always defer to educational opportunities.

And a quick post before I start actually working: the vote receivers so far:

peekercpa (2): Chronos 360, Meeko 383

Chronos voting because he thinks peeker is a distraction, because peeker made what Chronos sees as an unsupported vote of TexCat, and because peeker could have been trying to get the benefits of both an early and a late claim.

Meeko for “policy reasons” related to peeker’s unclear communication.

Thanks to ed’s exposition I can kind of understand Chronos’ reasoning about peeker’s scum motivation - it still seems like a stretch to me. I have no idea if peeker is scum or town but I haven’t seen anything that looks scummy (as opposed to anti-town) to me in his behavior thus far. I don’t like Meeko’s policy vote.

One And Only Wanderers (1): Jimmy Chitwood 184

For fishing for extra information from Chronos after Chronos had already given his name and profession. Also, for the typo vote.

This is a look-and-feel thing, and I don’t really have the time to go back and reread, but I don’t get much of a scum feel from OneAndOnly thus far.

KellyCriterion (1): NAF1138 313

For voting NAF for a typo and then promptly unvoting.

Since this vote, Kelly has not reappeared. I mentioned in the spoiled thread for Cecil Pond that I was going to keep an eye on low-participation noobs (and near-noobs); this case deserves some attention but, well, see next vote recipient.

TexCat (2): Red Skeezix 316, Tom Scud 328

Skeezix for voting peeker without explaining his scum motivation for creating a huge distraction. Tom Scud for voting peeker for obfuscating at a point when peeker had just posted his clearest post of the day (at 303); I also expressed suspicion that TexCat was trying to start a wagon on a controversial player.

I’m still comfortable with this vote; unless peeker is scum, there’s a clear scum motive in stirring the pot around him, and TexCat’s vote certainly had that effect. Before the vote peeker’s somewhat obscure/obfuscated claim was one topic among many; afterwards it takes up most of the next 3 pages.

Oredigger77 (1): Drain Bead 347

For pushing on Meeko’s supposed PIS. (Or rather, for wondering why other people weren’t pushing on it).

I dislike the sort of passive-aggressive way Digger phrased the original query that drew Drain’s ire (and to a lesser extent, Jimmy’s). If you want to express suspicion of someone, express suspicion, don’t wonder out loud why other people aren’t. Doesn’t rise to the level of a vote for me, though.

Red Skeezix (2): TexCat 356, Freudian Slit 364

TexCat because she thinks creating a distraction is in and of itself enough of a scum motivation & thus she thinks Red’s vote was undersupported; Freudian because she thinks peeker was acting scummy and thus TexCat’s vote was justifiable & voting for her for an unjustified vote is scummy.

Obviously this rides on my analysis of TexCat’s vote; I don’t think Red’s vote was scummy because I think TexCat’s vote was scummy because I don’t think peeker was scummy (as opposed to distracting/anti-Town). Thus I don’t really buy either rationale, though I could see how either one of them could be honest about their own reasons.

Chronos (2): storyteller0910 416, peekercpa 450

story for riding peeker hard and then voting on him when the Town’s mood seemed opportune; peeker for basically OMGUS reasons.

I’ll have to reread some time when I’m not rushed, but from memories of rereads past, Chronos didn’t stick out much as riding peeker; special ed and (in his own way) Meeko both stand out more in my mind, and to be honest the person most responsible for riding peeker over the past 150 posts is peeker and his “in the good old days people used to THINK about Mafia. Wake up, sheeple!” schtick.

In summary, I’m comfortable with my vote where it is.

Also, I was hoping MHaye would manage to make his usual summing-everything-up-from-on-high appearance a bit earlier than the last day of the Day, but I guess that’s not going to happen.

That actually makes a lot of sense to me. It also explains why he was so vague. And the Elizabeth Berkeley photo–if he got the sense that other scum was NOT posting their real IDs, he could play coy and act like it was just a game, he was just playing around–see, he posted a pic of the chick in Showgirls. Why are you taking this so seriously? But since there were other “evil” roles, he could be all, “Yeah, that’s my role, wtf? How is that not obvious! fsalkfjsaf!”

So. unvote red
**
vote peeker**

You can’t really say that someone is scum every time they vote for you, dude. It smacks of OMGUS. Anyway, why is it that he’s flawed, and yet the fact that you get votes all the time on day one doesn’t mean that you as a player are flawed?

Here is the thing.

I half want to vote Peeker just to shut his smug rear end up.

After that, he wont be able to pull any of this stuff ever again.

We can’t get to that point, untill we lynch him.

That’s probably not how you play Mafia. But, for First day vote, I will throw it in with the rest of my reasons to vote him.

only on this board and with this group of players.

what is the goal of this game? my understanding is that it is to win. until i started playing again on this board i was running at about a 70 percent success rate (100 percent in the games that i last to the end). so i guess flawed would be open to interpretation. depending on your definition of "flawed.

yaknow if certain folks can’t be arsed enough to review all of the information that is available then i really don’t have a response.

seriously, the attitude that “this post is too long and therefore i won’t read it” or “omg there is a video link” or “crap his/her spelling is atrocious and am therefore ignoring” is not real helpful. just my two cents, of course.

hey look, i am just trying to state my case. if you want to lynch me i won’t pull the “fuck you, i am taking my ball and going home”. i just think that the folks that want to lynch me because of some sort of innane, good natured attempt at claiming has created a whole shitstorm.

seriously, when i flip town those are the folks that will have egg on their face. and like i said earlier either whoopee we got some scum or even better we get some folks that will learn from their mistakes and choose to play a little better game.