Mafiascum.net

In post 99, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 76, Ircher wrote:You go from something that can be interpreted as a light townread/joke to saying Crepppy was obvtown to saying that you never townread Crepppy in the first place. Please clarify this inconsistency.

It was a joke. There wasn't a light townread because the light townread was a joke. There wasn't an obvtown read because the obvtown read was a joke. Is this really the best reason you have for scumreading someone so far?

(We also have the wagon hop, but for the most part, yes, it is.)

(To clarify, it wasn't clear it was all a joke; I was under the impression it was initially a joke but somehow became an actual townread.)

So you thought he was joking about it being a lean townread but was serious about everyone thinking creoppy was obvtown even though crepppy had done nothing and no one said that they thought crepppy was obvtown?

In post 84, ofrhz wrote: I don't like this. In the first post, vulcan logician is taking a temperature of the room to see if anyone else agrees with him. And once someone else votes Ircher first, only then does he vote and his analysis of Ircher goes from "odd" to "SUPER awkward."

I do think that Vulcan's progression on his Ircher read doesn't really make sense.


In the first two posts that Vulcan makes about Ircher, it seems like he doesn't buy that Ircher doesn't get his joke at all, and yet, no vote. After Draynth votes, then it's suddenly like Vulcan remembers that he can vote people that he suspects (and swaps his vote to follow Draynth despite his vote on Harambe suddenly turning serious).

That was worded wrong; initially I thought it was likely a joke but decided to pressure anyway. When Vulcan kept reasserting it, I thought he was being serious about it, and stopped considering the “he’s joking” possibility.

In post 103, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 84, ofrhz wrote: I don't like this. In the first post, vulcan logician is taking a temperature of the room to see if anyone else agrees with him. And once someone else votes Ircher first, only then does he vote and his analysis of Ircher goes from "odd" to "SUPER awkward."

I do think that Vulcan's progression on his Ircher read doesn't really make sense.

Spoiler: Vulcan's posts leading up to the vote

In post 19, vulcan logician wrote:There was one guy on that wagon! How is that "ever popular"?

And Crepppy is obv-town. Why can't you see that? I think it's pretty clear to the rest of us.

In post 48, vulcan logician wrote:The wagon formed on Harambe on page 1 is not going to do a good job of pressuring him. The first wagon to form usually dissolves, so scum!Harambe would have nothing to fear from it. I do like to use day 1 to put pressure on people though. There are not many ways to get info for town on day 1, but putting questions to people under threat of lynch is a viable strategy for town.

My townread of crepppy was a joke. Anyone taking it seriously strikes me as odd for doing so. Look at the reasoning I used.

More to come from me. Stay tuned.

In post 53, vulcan logician wrote:I'll hop on the Ircher wagon. It's SUPER awkward to take me seriously there.

VOTE: Ircher

I still got my eye on Harambe though. Perhaps he clammed up when the wagon gained momentum. I can see scum!Harambe being like "Oh shit! They took me to L-1 already!" And not knowing what to say. But we can always wagon him later if need be. For now, let's examine Ircher.

In the first two posts that Vulcan makes about Ircher, it seems like he doesn't buy that Ircher doesn't get his joke at all, and yet, no vote. After Draynth votes, then it's suddenly like Vulcan remembers that he can vote people that he suspects (and swaps his vote to follow Draynth despite his vote on Harambe suddenly turning serious).

Vote: Vulcan

Are you for real? Seriously, I didn't think that hard about it. It was RVS. As I said before, a wagon formed on page 1 is bound to dissolve. It's not even a good way to put pressure on scum because they it's RVS.

Just making it official here: The page 1 obvtown read was a joke.

I'm gonna have to get some coffee in me and come at this game serious-like.

Quite frankly, I don't like the RVS. The only thing that makes it worthwhile are the jokes IMO. Day 1 in general ranks as my least favorite portion of the game precisely because there is so little information to analyze, yet so much analysis going on.

There are two ways to interpret my earlier statements. As you have done, putting all sorts of motives in where there are none -OR- as someone who is pretty much clueless, moving his votes around because he has NO INFORMATION to go on.

Let me read through the thread and see if anyone directed questions at me. I will answer them. Then I will scrounge together a general defense. Stay tuned.

Vote Count 1.4

vulcan logician (3) - Ventriloquist, Ircher, Nachomamma8
Alciel (2) - ofrhz, Harambey180
Ircher (2) - Draynth, vulcan logician
Harambey180 (1) - Alciel
Ventriloquist (1) - Etromin

Not voting (0) -


With nine players alive, it takes five votes to lynch.

Deadline for Day One is Wednesday, 16th May, 09.00. BST, (in (expired on 2018-05-16 09:00:00)).

In post 45, Harambey180 wrote:I don't know how familiar you are with mafia games so I approached you here as if you're pretty new to the game. I hope this is okay as how it is.

Sorry, I am pretty new and still testing the waters, there's also the site format that I'm not used to... I'll be reading the previous post and reply to some that I can though to be honest I can't understand some of the abbreviations...

In post 109, Alciel wrote:

In post 45, Harambey180 wrote:I don't know how familiar you are with mafia games so I approached you here as if you're pretty new to the game. I hope this is okay as how it is.

Sorry, I am pretty new and still testing the waters, there's also the site format that I'm not used to... I'll be reading the previous post and reply to some that I can though to be honest I can't understand some of the abbreviations...

I googled the ones I was unsure of as I read the thread, in case it helps:

NAI/AI - Not Alignment Indicative/Alignment Indicative
V/LA - Vacation - Limited Access
RVS - Random Voting Stage

More comprehensive list here:
https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... reviations

On initial read I don't feel like anyone has been obliquely scummy, but it is too early to tell. Initial thoughts.

ofrhz - Has made some sound observations (calling out Harambey180 at the start looked reasonable to me, since creating a wagon and not giving even a single line of reasoning seems suspicious).
Etromin - Hasn't said an awful lot, but just enough to get by. I think Etromin has been very mild mannered which wouldn't be a bad playstyle for scum.
vulcan logician - Honestly I understood that you were joking, the obvious townread was clearly not serious. I don't think you've done anything that scummy.
Alciel - Alongside Harambey180, it was disconcerting to see you jump onto a wagon without any justification - however I appreciate these are early votes so you probably want to elicit a reaction
Draynth (SE) - Seemingly unpredictable behaviour, but I don't have any strong read on Draynth
Ircher (SE) - I feel like you were a tad obtuse in response to Vulcan, and have tried to justify yourself a little too much (complaining about being mislynched in other games is hardly a defense for avoiding a lynch in this one) but you have also been quite vocal and helped discussion prosper
Harambey180 (SE) - Again, like Ircher I don't enjoy the comparisons to behaviour in another game - bandwagonning with no reason, then deciding to be vocal because Nachomamma called you out on it, whilst simulataneously saying lots of Nachomamma's posts don't make sense - seems a bit conflicted. However I don't think voting for you would apply anymore pressure or offer better results than what was already discover on the initial wagon you suffered
Nachomamma8 (IC) - Very acute observations, even if a bit alarmist. You seem to have a leader aura about you, which is scary for scum if you're a good guy, but equally horrifying for town if it turns out you're scum showing ballsy initiative.

VOTE: Vote: Etromin - for now

In post 54, Harambey180 wrote:"Oh yeah, Ircher is V/LA, let's all put him to L-1 to give him a scare when he comes back."

Probably scum will be on the Ircher wagon bcuz going from 0 votes to L-1 during V/LA will probably give an awkward response from Ircher. I'm not gonna do that for the sake of him being V/LA. It's good to get a reaction from him but his reaction will considerably be weaker than usual and scum will make use of that. No ty.

I'll instead go with VOTE: Alciel because I still think his posts are awkward.

I thought I was being polite by saying 'hello'.

In post 58, Draynth wrote:

In post 29, Alciel wrote:

In post 23, Ircher wrote:@Ali - Explain please.
Pedit: Nvm my warning

He didn't state a reason so I voted for him, same reason why you're asking me thid. Didn't state mine since no one really asked him why for his vote.

This isn't really helpful by the way, Townies want to be as transparent as possible whenever possible. It makes you easier to read and work out what your motivations are. Scum will be intentionally obtuse and awkward about their intentions.

If you see someone doing something you consider to be scummy then definitely bring it up, even if you haven't seen anyone else do so.

Well how can I be transparent?
I know that I was jumping on a bandwagon without valid reason. Is that honest enough?

In post 63, ofrhz wrote:

In post 39, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 28, Ircher wrote:About the ‘Hello’ — If we consider it to be an RVS vote (which is reasonable), then I don’t read it really as alignment-indicative; it’s about the same as writing nothing.

I agree with this, but, if I'm reading correctly, ofrhz doesn't. I don't understand why.
Ofrhz - if Alciel just naked voted Harambey, would you have the same reaction to his post? Why/why not?

No, it wouldn’t be the same. A naked vote indicates some level of comfort with the vote because the person didn’t feel the need to defend it. But tacking on a “hello” indicates that the person didn’t feel comfortable naked voting yet felt like they had to say something, but couldn’t come up with anything less lighthearted than hello. It’s awk

So it would've been better to be brusque and just cast my vote?
Or should I have posted something more witty like the others who voted?

In post 74, Ircher wrote:

In post 44, Alciel wrote:

In post 39, Nachomamma8 wrote:"He didn't state a reason, so I voted for him" - why do you have a policy of voting people who don't state reasons?
"Didn't state mine since no one really asked him why for his vote" - I don't understand what other people's reactions to him has to do with how you approach him here; it seems a bit backwards to me. Like, I could see if you were voting for someone and didn't feel like stating reasons because they've already been said but I don't understanding voting someone and NOT giving reasons because no one else seemed to see or care about the same thing you did. Help me out?

His vote didn't have a reason compared to others that at least posted something though nothing concrete, it's my first game and I'm still testing the waters, I'm also waiting if someone would question my lack of reasoning since I don't know if not giving reasoning is that common or not.

I mean, it really depends on the player. Some people (much to my annoyance) never give reasons and others do all the time. That said, I think it is preferable to give reasons so others can follow your thought process.

I wanted to know if I'd get the same response as he got when he didn't state anything but I don't want to sound like a wise ass.

In post 110, Ventriloquist wrote:

In post 109, Alciel wrote:

In post 45, Harambey180 wrote:I don't know how familiar you are with mafia games so I approached you here as if you're pretty new to the game. I hope this is okay as how it is.

Sorry, I am pretty new and still testing the waters, there's also the site format that I'm not used to... I'll be reading the previous post and reply to some that I can though to be honest I can't understand some of the abbreviations...

I googled the ones I was unsure of as I read the thread, in case it helps:

NAI/AI - Not Alignment Indicative/Alignment Indicative
V/LA - Vacation - Limited Access
RVS - Random Voting Stage

More comprehensive list here:
https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... reviations

Thank you.

In post 111, Ventriloquist wrote: Etromin - Hasn't said an awful lot, but just enough to get by. I think Etromin has been very mild mannered which wouldn't be a bad playstyle for scum.
VOTE: Vote: Etromin - for now

I don't really feel like I have much to talk about, to be honest. The only votes around that seem not to be pressure are those on the vulcan wagon, and I'm still trying to figure him out there. As for being mild-mannered, I tend to worry about coming across as scummy even when playing town, and being confrontational is rather suspicious, based on my past experience.

Post #110: Ventriloquist compiles some abbrevations in a list, which also includes RVS, standing for Random Voting Stage.
Post #111: Ventriloquist calls me out on bandwagoning while not giving a reason for my vote, which was in Random Voting Stage.
Can you see what's wrong here?

@Ventriloquist, I think you still don't get the concept of Random Voting Stage. We vote randomly at the start of the game so that we have something to start with. No need to give an explanation for a random vote, let alone it being bandwagoning. But besides this misconception of yours, your reads seem pretty decent.
Now, what do you want to get done with your vote on Etromin? Mind explaining us why that is your vote and if you want us to vote for Etromin as well, and why? In the end, we probably want to get someone lynched this day.

In post 106, vulcan logician wrote:Just making it official here: The page 1 obvtown read was a joke.

Here's somthing I don't get: why make the joke in the first place? It doesn't seem necessary and trying to crack non-obvious jokes on page 1 seems to be a bit of a stupid/risky thing to do.

In post 115, Etromin wrote:

In post 106, vulcan logician wrote:Just making it official here: The page 1 obvtown read was a joke.

Here's somthing I don't get: why make the joke in the first place? It doesn't seem necessary and trying to crack non-obvious jokes on page 1 seems to be a bit of a stupid/risky thing to do.

"Non-obvious?" I am going to quote my very first post below.

In post 9, vulcan logician wrote:

In post 7, crepppy wrote:VOTE: vulcan logician
Usernames shouldn't have spaces -_-

You are right about that. Elsewhere on the internet, I have it as all one word, but for some reason I put a space in there when registering on this site. Some would say, "not alignment indicative"... but I disagree. I'm gonna lean town on you for picking up on an obvious scumtell.

VOTE: Harambey

I said I leaned town on crepppy. Why? Because crepppy voted me because I had a space in my name. It was a joke.

Look at it this way. If I am scum, and my scum strategy is to conf town people on page 1 because they vote me for having a space in my name, you have nothing to fear. That means I have the worst scumgame imaginable and town is pretty much ensured victory.

In post 19, vulcan logician wrote: And Crepppy is obv-town. Why can't you see that? I think it's pretty clear to the rest of us.

@Vulcan I was referring to this post

In post 117, Etromin wrote:

In post 19, vulcan logician wrote: And Crepppy is obv-town. Why can't you see that? I think it's pretty clear to the rest of us.

@Vulcan I was referring to this post

I hope you can see that that post is a joke too, Etro. can seriously imply that anyone is "obvtown" on page 1 ever. I thought it was pretty clear that I was joking.

Think about what that would mean if I was serious. Look at Creppy's posts that preceded that post and ask yourself if I could have possibly been serious. Maybe I should have thrown an emoji in there, but I was going for deadpan.

Yeah, except newbies tend to be a bit on the wild side, so I cannot and would not rule out the possibility completely. (Not that being unpredictable is a bad thing...)

Sorry guys been a busy few days reading now

In post 104, Ircher wrote:I thought he was being serious about it, and stopped considering the “he’s joking” possibility.

And I think this was a mistake. I understand expecting newbies to be a bit wild but there's a difference between expecting someone to be a bit different from usual and refusing to believe anything but the most ridiculous possibility when you're the only one who thinks that it's the case and most evidence seems to disagree with you.

(And that is probably true...)

bumpity

bump