Mini 742 Monopoly Mafia - Game Over!

[Nightfall]

Spolium you've been here around 5 months?
I've been here around 4 years... I'm sorry I can't recall what one or two of my many games X event happened in. I thought with the talks of the game stalling I would come back and try and contribute more to the actual game at hand, but if you really want me to, I will gladly take the time to continue looking through past games to find you a suitable example.

As for day one I put my vote where I thought it best fit.
I was debating with Charter on the merits of name claiming
How was I taking pot shots at him anyway? If anyone was
taking pot shots at someone in that exchange it was him towards me.

[Spolium]

Like I said, I can't reasonably expect you to search every game you've ever played, but my point is that there was a noticable shift in the weight you were putting on your agreement following a simple enquiry.

IMO this is suspicious because you were implying that ywaeatagag was right to be concerned about a random phase bandwagon, which naturally directs suspicion towards those that were on the bandwagon (apart from charter, obviously).

As for the pot shots at charter comment, having re-read your interactions I don't see it so much (maybe I was thinking of someone else? I'll have to re-read at some point). You still get my vote for the above though.

[Alabaska J]

ywaeatagag.

ahahahahahahahaha

on a more serious note, are you guys talking about the three votes on gamma today or what? looking back i'm having trouble pinpointing which wagon you guys are talking about.

[Spolium]

Start with post #9 and work your way on from there...

[Nightfall]

IMO this is suspicious because you were implying that ywaeatagag was right to be concerned about a random phase bandwagon, which naturally directs suspicion towards those that were on the bandwagon (apart from charter, obviously).

I think players should be concerned about bandwagons in any phase let alone the random phase. In our case the early "Joke wagon" appeared to be the product of some metagaming between Charter and the others involved. If so that would have been a negative for the town as the players would have been letting outside factors affect this game.
And even in your time here, I'm sure that you must have seen a few
players that are a little too loose with their voting, no? I haven't played with many people in this game before/recently, but I do know that I have played with some people who have simply joined wagons because it was the "thing to do", and I've been in games where people meaning to add to a wagon actually place a hammer (This just happened a few days ago in another on going game of mine). I didn't want to see any bandwagons form without some actual merit behind them.

[Nightfall]

And just for the record, it was Yawetag that first commented on the dislike of "random bandwagons", and "mass-voting".
Your post (276) made it sound like I was leading him on, when really I was agreeing with him.

[MafiaSSK]

Finding replacement for yawetag. Sorry forgot to post this.

[pacman281292]

Spolium you've been here around 5 months?
I've been here around 4 years... I'm sorry I can't recall what one or two of my many games X event happened in. I thought with the talks of the game stalling I would come back and try and contribute more to the actual game at hand, but if you really want me to, I will gladly take the time to continue looking through past games to find you a suitable example.

Appeal to Authority=BAD.
Dismiss the game=BAD.

Mild FoS: nightfall

[Spolium]

I think players should be concerned about bandwagons in any phase let alone the random phase. In our case the early "Joke wagon" appeared to be the product of some metagaming between Charter and the others involved. If so that would have been a negative for the town as the players would have been letting outside factors affect this game.
And even in your time here, I'm sure that you must have seen a few
players that are a little too loose with their voting, no? I haven't played with many people in this game before/recently, but I do know that I have played with some people who have simply joined wagons because it was the "thing to do", and I've been in games where people meaning to add to a wagon actually place a hammer (This just happened a few days ago in another on going game of mine). I didn't want to see any bandwagons form without some actual merit behind them.

But that doesn't really address the main reason behind my vote, does it?

As I said before, my concern lies in the awkward shift from "

I've been in numerous games where random bandwagons led to lynches

" to "

well, it must've happened at SOME point in Mafia history

" to "

it's probably happened at some point, possibly not on this site

".

Since that you've shifted again, to "

I've been playing here for 4 years, I can't remember

the one or two games

in which event X happened

". Am I to take this as acknowledgement of a insignificantly low statistical probability of a random bandwagon spiraling out of control? You have, after all, been here for 4 years - presumably you've played many games on and off this site?

In 279 you seem to have dropped the idea of basing it on experience altogether, rationalising that because some players are "loose with their voting" or prone to joining wagons with gay abandon (or because people can mistakenly place hammers) we should be wary. I won't deny that these points are reasonable, but they're somewhat removed from your original arguments in 227 and 228, namely:

the votes together formed a very real band wagon that could easily have become our first "major wagon" for no other reason than a larger than normal number of jokevotes were placed on a player.

I've been in numerous games where innocent townies have been lynched on not so serious band wagons. [..] I'm not
sure how experienced all of our players are here, but it is possible that in a l-1 situation a townie might place a hammer without "much" of a case simply because everyone else was voting for him/her

This just seems off to me.

And just for the record, it was Yawetag that first commented on the dislike of "random bandwagons", and "mass-voting".
Your post (276) made it sound like I was leading him on, when really I was agreeing with him.

In what sense did I make it sound like you were leading him on?

[Nightfall]

Spolium you've been here around 5 months?
I've been here around 4 years... I'm sorry I can't recall what one or two of my many games X event happened in. I thought with the talks of the game stalling I would come back and try and contribute more to the actual game at hand, but if you really want me to, I will gladly take the time to continue looking through past games to find you a suitable example.

Appeal to Authority=BAD.
Dismiss the game=BAD.

Mild FoS: nightfall

I wasn't trying to say that I have anytype of authority here.
My point about being here for years is that it's hard to keep track of what happened when/in what games. And yes I'm aware that dismissing this game would be bad, the "if you want" part was kind of a sarcastic way at saying that... I guess I failed there...

But that doesn't really address the main reason behind my vote, does it?

As I said before, my concern lies in the awkward shift from "

I've been in numerous games where random bandwagons led to lynches

" to "

well, it must've happened at SOME point in Mafia history

" to "

it's probably happened at some point, possibly not on this site

".

Since that you've shifted again, to "

I've been playing here for 4 years, I can't remember

the one or two games

in which event X happened

". Am I to take this as acknowledgement of a insignificantly low statistical probability of a random bandwagon spiraling out of control? You have, after all, been here for 4 years - presumably you've played many games on and off this site?

In 279 you seem to have dropped the idea of basing it on experience altogether, rationalising that because some players are "loose with their voting" or prone to joining wagons with gay abandon (or because people can mistakenly place hammers) we should be wary. I won't deny that these points are reasonable, but they're somewhat removed from your original arguments in 227 and 228, namely:

the votes together formed a very real band wagon that could easily have become our first "major wagon" for no other reason than a larger than normal number of jokevotes were placed on a player.

I've been in numerous games where innocent townies have been lynched on not so serious band wagons. [..] I'm not
sure how experienced all of our players are here, but it is possible that in a l-1 situation a townie might place a hammer without "much" of a case simply because everyone else was voting for him/her

This just seems off to me.

And just for the record, it was Yawetag that first commented on the dislike of "random bandwagons", and "mass-voting".
Your post (276) made it sound like I was leading him on, when really I was agreeing with him.

In what sense did I make it sound like you were leading him on?

Sorry if I don't hit on everything your asking. There's a lot and I'm trying to get it all

I actually dont see an awkward shift in my responses. I claimed that I have been in games where joke wagons / wagons of little content have gotten out of control / innocents have been lynched, and I stand by that claim.

My comment of "When I get a chance I'll look over some past games and see if I can find something. I'm sure it must have happened in mafia history though. " came after you asked for me to provide an example and I think that you have been reading too much into it. At the time I knew it could take a while to go through past games to find an example so I made that comment to essentially say that yes I will look for an example for you, but even if it takes me a while to find you one, don’t write off what I am saying because I’m sure it must have happened at some point.

And I'm pretty sure that I never said...

"

it's probably happened at some point, possibly not on this site

".

I will agree with your point that there is a low statistical probability of a random bandwagon spiraling out of control. My point was that it can/does happen once in a while and that is why I made the comments that I did.
Three of the first six votes in this game were for the same player, with no real reason given. If someone was to scan the posts to that point, which I think Yaw might have done when he requested a vote count on post 14, that person may accidentally also count EMP's double post as a vote too. I believe that I took the apropriate response to that happening and asked if there was somesort of metagaming going on with those involved. If you go back and read the thread, you'll see that more members then myself were concerned. Yaw and Pac both questioned the actions of the wagoners and voted for them too.

As for your comments on my post 279 I don't see how I've "dropped" any ideas. My point has always been that bandwagons can lead to quick votes, and quick lynches which is why we shouldn't let a "joke" one get too big. Please keep in mind a fair few players thought a hammer was made on page 5 in day one in this game... I think that alone shows how loosely people were keeping track of where votes were placed.

As for

In what sense did I make it sound like you were leading him on?

[/quote]

Is that not one way the following could be taken?

IMO this is suspicious because you were implying that ywaeatagag was right to be concerned about a random phase bandwagon, which naturally directs suspicion towards those that were on the bandwagon (apart from charter, obviously).

To me it looked like you were saying that I was adding fuel to Yaw's fires of suspicion. And again, when 3 of the first 6 votes in a game (4 of 7 if you accidently count EMP's double post) are for the same person, I think there certainly is a reason to be worried or atleast question those on the wagon, which is what Yaw, myself, and others did.


I hope that covers everything. And while I'm sure you will have something to say back to me, which I in turn will be happy to answer could I request that we also hear some more from our other players?
Maybe some prods?
I personally would like to hear from Gamma's replacement.

[Grimmy]

Well, nothing's going to go on unless people do something.

So I guess I'll be that person.

fos: alabaska J

Don't ask for analysis but not post any good content yourself.

vote: grimmy

You're only long post is just speculation on the flavor that corresponds to roles, which isn't really to useful. Other than that, you've made six posts, two of which were joke posts, one was explaining a joke, and one was your 'checking in' post. That leaves two posts which I would consider semi-useful. There has been plenty of stuff for you to comment on, why haven't you done such?

I still find jebus scummy,

but if grimmy's play so far isn't anti-town and/or scummy, I don't know what is.

Highlighted my favorite part.

I made a post based on my first read through.
my check-ins are to let everyone know im still in the game and to not get prodded or replaced.
yet this is vote worthy?
you make it sound like I am the ONLY person in this game who hasnt contributed.

FOS and sticking out tongue: AC

and a neener neener thrown in for good measure.

Anywho
on to more important things.

I see the point that Nightfall was trying to make, but I think that the only time joke voting and such really hurt the town was in those bad idea mafia games where everyone had guns and tried to get thier shots in before everyone else, and it ended with alot of dead townies before anyone else could post. Its

FOS:Nightfall

=worthy right now, but not enough for me to vote on it. Either he got backed into a corner, or he was bragging too much and got his wires crossed. Worth keeping an eye on.

More soon
Grimmy
throws yet ANOTHER neener neener at AC

[Grimmy]

Nightfall is definately scum, he has still not added anything to this game.

Excuse me... I was one of the very first people to argue against your idea
of mass name claiming and have continued to debate that issue with you as you haven't seemed to want to give it up... What else have you contributed?

Given opinions on quite a few people. You haven't.

this is a bullshit reason to call someone definitely scum. just sayin.

Question: what are your thoughts about AC doing basically the same thing?

Grimmy
going backwards in the game

[ac1983fan]

Well, nothing's going to go on unless people do something.

So I guess I'll be that person.

fos: alabaska J

Don't ask for analysis but not post any good content yourself.

vote: grimmy

You're only long post is just speculation on the flavor that corresponds to roles, which isn't really to useful. Other than that, you've made six posts, two of which were joke posts, one was explaining a joke, and one was your 'checking in' post. That leaves two posts which I would consider semi-useful. There has been plenty of stuff for you to comment on, why haven't you done such?

I still find jebus scummy,

but if grimmy's play so far isn't anti-town and/or scummy, I don't know what is.

Highlighted my favorite part.

I made a post based on my first read through.
my check-ins are to let everyone know im still in the game and to not get prodded or replaced.
yet this is vote worthy?
you make it sound like I am the ONLY person in this game who hasnt contributed.

FOS and sticking out tongue: AC

and a neener neener thrown in for good measure.

Anywho
on to more important things.

I see the point that Nightfall was trying to make, but I think that the only time joke voting and such really hurt the town was in those bad idea mafia games where everyone had guns and tried to get thier shots in before everyone else, and it ended with alot of dead townies before anyone else could post. Its

FOS:Nightfall

=worthy right now, but not enough for me to vote on it. Either he got backed into a corner, or he was bragging too much and got his wires crossed. Worth keeping an eye on.

More soon
Grimmy
throws yet ANOTHER neener neener at AC

unvote

more posts like this please.

[Grimmy]

Major FOS: Gamma

Between the hammer and the gameplay, he is a likely candidate, but i want to see what his possible replacement says first

Grimmy

[Nightfall]

My post(s) looked like I was bragging? O_O

[Alabaska J]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

[ac1983fan]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

Again, he had only made one large, non-joke post at the time of my voting him, which was mostly a list of possible role names. So kinda, although I'm willing to go back to voting him if he starts posting non-contribution posts again.
Also, why don't you post some analysis, Alabaska?

[MafiaSSK]

Major FOS: Gamma

Between the hammer and the gameplay, he is a likely candidate, but i want to see what his possible replacement says first

Grimmy

Remember ooba replaced Gamma.Sending prod to ooba

[Spolium]

Sorry if I don't hit on everything your asking. There's a lot and I'm trying to get it all

That's cool, I do have a tendency to hurt brains with wallposts. I will try to be more concise.

My comment of "When I get a chance I'll look over some past games and see if I can find something. I'm sure it must have happened in mafia history though. " came after you asked for me to provide an example and I think that you have been reading too much into it. At the time I knew it could take a while to go through past games to find an example so I made that comment to essentially say that yes I will look for an example for you, but even if it takes me a while to find you one, don’t write off what I am saying because I’m sure it must have happened at some point.

This seems reasonable, though I'm not convinced that I'm reading too much into it. To go from "event (x) has happened in numerous games in which I've played" to "I'll see if I can find something, but it must've happened at some point in mafia history" seems like a significant shift to me.

And I'm pretty sure that I never said...

"

it's probably happened at some point, possibly not on this site

".

I was paraphrasing. In your own words:

31 - "

There's a (likely) chance it

wouldn't have happened here

, but it

could have

However, I think I misunderstood what you meant by "here" (I took it to mean this site, as opposed to this game).

I will agree with your point that there is a low statistical probability of a random bandwagon spiraling out of control. My point was that it can/does happen once in a while and that is why I made the comments that I did.
Three of the first six votes in this game were for the same player, with no real reason given.

Numerous votes on the first page with no reason provided? MY GOD

I believe that I took the apropriate response to that happening and asked if there was somesort of metagaming going on with those involved. If you go back and read the thread, you'll see that more members then myself were concerned. Yaw and Pac both questioned the actions of the wagoners and voted for them too.

I have no problem with people being concerned, but yawetag was responding to a vote on him by emphasising that the 3-man bandwagon was scummier than his refusal to answer a simple question, and used sketchy reasoning to justify labelling that bandwagon as non-random.

As for your comments on my post 279 I don't see how I've "dropped" any ideas. My point has always been that bandwagons can lead to quick votes, and quick lynches which is why we shouldn't let a "joke" one get too big. Please keep in mind a fair few players thought a hammer was made on page 5 in day one in this game... I think that alone shows how loosely people were keeping track of where votes were placed.

What I meant was that you dropped the experience-based justification (necessarily, since you couldn't cite evidence) and shifted to a more justifiable position. You do make a good point about players losing track of where the hammer fell, but it's also worth noting that they erred in an entirely different way (i.e. thinking the hammer dropped before it did, rather than mistakenly placing a hammer).

In what sense did I make it sound like you were leading him on?

Is that not one way the following could be taken?

IMO this is suspicious because you were implying that ywaeatagag was right to be concerned about a random phase bandwagon, which naturally directs suspicion towards those that were on the bandwagon (apart from charter, obviously).

To me it looked like you were saying that I was adding fuel to Yaw's fires of suspicion. And again, when 3 of the first 6 votes in a game (4 of 7 if you accidently count EMP's double post) are for the same person, I think there certainly is a reason to be worried or atleast question those on the wagon, which is what Yaw, myself, and others did.[/quote]

Please take note of the two statements prior to the one which you interperet above:

Spolium

Like I said, I can't reasonably expect you to search every game you've ever played, but my point is that there was a noticable shift in the weight you were putting

on your agreement

following a simple enquiry.

IMO this is suspicious because

you were implying that ywaeatagag was right to be concerned

about a random phase bandwagon, which naturally directs suspicion towards those that were on the bandwagon (apart from charter, obviously).

Parts emboldened for emphasis.

I hope that covers everything. And while I'm sure you will have something to say back to me, which I in turn will be happy to answer could I request that we also hear some more from our other players?

My, aren't we friendly?

[Spolium]

Damn, messed up some quotes. To clarify:

In what sense did I make it sound like you were leading him on?

Is that not one way the following could be taken?

IMO this is suspicious because you were implying that ywaeatagag was right to be concerned about a random phase bandwagon, which naturally directs suspicion towards those that were on the bandwagon (apart from charter, obviously).

To me it looked like you were saying that I was adding fuel to Yaw's fires of suspicion. And again, when 3 of the first 6 votes in a game (4 of 7 if you accidently count EMP's double post) are for the same person, I think there certainly is a reason to be worried or atleast question those on the wagon, which is what Yaw, myself, and others did.

[Alabaska J]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

Again, he had only made one large, non-joke post at the time of my voting him, which was mostly a list of possible role names. So kinda, although I'm willing to go back to voting him if he starts posting non-contribution posts again.
Also, why don't you post some analysis, Alabaska?

speaking of not posting a lot of analysis, you've posted shockingly little yourself. one post on how you thought grimmy was scummy and then you take it back immediately after one post defending himself. grimmy was hardly the biggest offender. if you were gonna go after people for not contributing, we have people who don't even seem to post anymore. i'm finding you fairly hypocritical right now.

[ac1983fan]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

Again, he had only made one large, non-joke post at the time of my voting him, which was mostly a list of possible role names. So kinda, although I'm willing to go back to voting him if he starts posting non-contribution posts again.
Also, why don't you post some analysis, Alabaska?

speaking of not posting a lot of analysis, you've posted shockingly little yourself. one post on how you thought grimmy was scummy and then you take it back immediately after one post defending himself. grimmy was hardly the biggest offender. if you were gonna go after people for not contributing, we have people who don't even seem to post anymore. i'm finding you fairly hypocritical right now.

I replaced in one week ago. Grimmy seemed incredibly anti-town, so my vote was mostly because he wasn't contributing anything relevant whatsoever. Posting non-contributive posts can be worse than not posting. I feel like all of my posts have been contribution. Asking for analysis but not posting any isn't helpful. I'm trying to be helpful. Grimmy has apparantly decided to be helpful (hopefully), although I'm willing to vote him again if he restarts his anti-town behavior. You are not really being helpful, all your doing is trying to cast suspicion on the person asking the person asking for analysis to post some of his own.

[Grimmy]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

Again, he had only made one large, non-joke post at the time of my voting him, which was mostly a list of possible role names. So kinda, although I'm willing to go back to voting him if he starts posting non-contribution posts again.
Also, why don't you post some analysis, Alabaska?

speaking of not posting a lot of analysis, you've posted shockingly little yourself. one post on how you thought grimmy was scummy and then you take it back immediately after one post defending himself. grimmy was hardly the biggest offender. if you were gonna go after people for not contributing, we have people who don't even seem to post anymore. i'm finding you fairly hypocritical right now.

I replaced in one week ago. Grimmy seemed incredibly anti-town, so my vote was mostly because he wasn't contributing anything relevant whatsoever. Posting non-contributive posts can be worse than not posting. I feel like all of my posts have been contribution. Asking for analysis but not posting any isn't helpful. I'm trying to be helpful. Grimmy has apparantly decided to be helpful (hopefully), although I'm willing to vote him again if he restarts his anti-town behavior. You are not really being helpful, all your doing is trying to cast suspicion on the person asking the person asking for analysis to post some of his own.

Might as well throw that vote back on me now, pilgrim.

Joking alot is my playstyle, and you find it disagreeable, I guess we know where you vote will stay for the majority of the game.

and dont try to convince me otherwise, lowering your glasses and using an authoritative tone saying "grimmy, this is a serious situation and we expect you to treat it as such...wahh wahh wahh..(charlie brown teacher voice)

The whole point of playing a quote unquote "game" is to have quote unquote "fun" and my quote unquote "Non Serious Joking" is my way of having said quote unquote "fun"



so in a preemptive neener, I throw a

Vote: Ac

you need to lighten up, or a wet willy. since my hands are busy typing, you get the sloppy vote.

neener neener.

Grimmy
juggling votes in the air to the applause of the crowd.

[Grimmy]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

this is why he voted for me. I accept that he will be the wet towel in my swimming pool of fun for this game.

Im ok with it. but if he does do something REALLY scummy, I will be the first to call him out on it.

<cyber wedgies AC>

neener neener
Grimmy

[ac1983fan]

I replaced in one week ago. Grimmy seemed incredibly anti-town, so my vote was mostly because he wasn't contributing anything relevant whatsoever. Posting non-contributive posts can be worse than not posting. I feel like all of my posts have been contribution. Asking for analysis but not posting any isn't helpful. I'm trying to be helpful. Grimmy has apparantly decided to be helpful (hopefully), although I'm willing to vote him again if he restarts his anti-town behavior. You are not really being helpful, all your doing is trying to cast suspicion on the person asking the person asking for analysis to post some of his own.

Might as well throw that vote back on me now, pilgrim.

Joking alot is my playstyle, and you find it disagreeable, I guess we know where you vote will stay for the majority of the game.

and dont try to convince me otherwise, lowering your glasses and using an authoritative tone saying "grimmy, this is a serious situation and we expect you to treat it as such...wahh wahh wahh..(charlie brown teacher voice)

The whole point of playing a quote unquote "game" is to have quote unquote "fun" and my quote unquote "Non Serious Joking" is my way of having said quote unquote "fun"



so in a preemptive neener, I throw a

Vote: Ac

you need to lighten up, or a wet willy. since my hands are busy typing, you get the sloppy vote.

neener neener.

Grimmy
juggling votes in the air to the applause of the crowd.

I don't mind jokes, just don't make useless posts. You can joke AND make contributions at the same time.