Mafiascum.net

Lynching

With 9 votes in play, it takes 5 to lynch.

PenguinPower

(2): CheekyTeeky, Enter

ArthurConyl

(2): Ph0enix, chazary

Enter

(2): PenguinPower, Farren

chazary

(1): Mitillos

Not Voting

(2): ArthurConyl, Pine

Deadline:

(expired on 2019-12-21 08:00:00).

[/area]

@Enter: Why Penguin? I don't think you've even mentioned him before.

UNVOTE:
Regardless of the answer to the above, both Pine and Enter's posts look scummy to me. Consider my vote as being on both of them at this time.

My vote was moved off Farkran for the same reason that you voting for Pine right now would be a bit on the silly side, and it has little to do with how scummy he is.

In post 382, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 362, Ph0enix wrote:Given the fact that playstyle can vary from game to game, regardless of alignment, and so is not a constant, and is also dependent on outside factors, don't you think it's a bit much to make that a sole argument against someone in order to vote for them?

Not at all. These arguments are called "meta" reads and they're commonly used when players know each other. PP and I have history, this read isn't based on one game.

How does one not interpret that as: "I have no other arguments against PP, so I'm just going to say that the fact he's quieter this game is making him suspicious in my eyes, even though I absolutely cannot say for sure that PP not being as active as I'm used to him being is even a solid argument given the fact that a change of playstyle is not necessarily alignment indicative."?

Enter, post 376: "Penguin's vote for this slot on Page 12 looks pretty opportunistic. I haven't seen anything from Penguin that makes me think he's not scum - his posting feels somewhat formulated, his resistance to the lack of momentum on my slot is worth a second look at later on in the game - and I think I'd be willing to lynch that slot as well, today."

So where is that "second look"? You just voted him directly.

Also the fact that Pine unvoted PP instead of answering my question as to why he voted him in the first place raises some suspicion. I'm not convinced by his "Starting a full read" statement.

CheekyTeeky wrote:Yeah this is looking TvT.

How's that?

You want to push me? Fine. I'll put more effort into obvtowning in about 24 hours if the group decides that's a good use of its time, but that seems pretty counter productive from my stand point right now (although considering I just replaced in and I'm going to play tonally awkward as I have to do things I normally wouldn't in order to maintain a somewhat optimal town play from myself, I can understand why you'd expect something of the like).

In post 405, Ph0enix wrote:So where is that "second look"? You just voted him directly.

I don't post every thought that crosses my mind. Posting "catch-ups" and "thought responses" to every post and explanations for every action and vote is actually somewhat of a rarity for me as of recently. I can go into detail about why I think the other play style is typically less optimal for town, but I'd prefer to have this discussion tomorrow.

Enter wrote: I don't post every thought that crosses my mind. Posting "catch-ups" and "thought responses" to every post and explanations for every action and vote is actually somewhat of a rarity for me as of recently.

If that's actually the case, doesn't that simply result in needless additional pressure onto you from other players, provided you are Town? I don't see how speaking your mind would be a problem, we are all looking for information, after all. Preferring to not do so, however? I mean, how am I supposed to react to the fact that you are explaining such a vote on another player through playstyle alone?

In post 408, Ph0enix wrote:

Enter wrote: I don't post every thought that crosses my mind. Posting "catch-ups" and "thought responses" to every post and explanations for every action and vote is actually somewhat of a rarity for me as of recently.

If that's actually the case, doesn't that simply result in needless additional pressure onto you from other players, provided you are Town? I don't see how speaking your mind would be a problem, we are all looking for information, after all. Preferring to not do so, however? I mean, how am I supposed to react to the fact that you are explaining such a vote on another player through playstyle alone?

The only information town needs from me is my alignment. Items such as "who the majority players think are scummy and are thus not worth a night kill" and "who many players think are so town they will never lynch them and thus are very worthy of a night kill" are utilized mainly by scum. In most games I am present for the majority of day 1 and it becomes very obvious what my alignment is. In general large reads lists with a lot of depth and every thought allows scum players to comfortably understand the game state without having to actually enter a town mind set.

Additionally, if you think PenguinPower is scummy enough to be deserving of a vote on your own, that will happen without my assistance.

In post 409, Enter wrote: The only information town needs from me is my alignment.

Directly, yes, but indirectly it may lead to other people giving information as well (both on purpose or because of a mistake). Sure, you may say, given my previous sentence, that that makes me suspicious and that it sounds as if I'm simply trying to get more information out of others in order to have a better idea of who to kill at night or something. After all, it lines up with your statement below:

In post 409, Enter wrote: In general large reads lists with a lot of depth and every thought allows scum players to comfortably understand the game state without having to actually enter a town mind set.

Which is a fair statement, but given the fact that silence and less information is, without a doubt, in favor of scum, is it beneficial to scum only? I believe it goes both ways.

Also, none of this explains the vote on PP. And by the way, there's a scenario where you wanted to jump on the PP wagon as the third vote and now that Pine withdrew his one you want to change yours but can't because it will undoubtedly seem too shady. As a result, you are stuck with your current vote and trying (not trying yet, but you get my point) to justify a vote that was not meant to be justified in the first place. Unless, of course, you have a valid reason for the vote. So you may want, despite it not being a part of your playstyle recently, as you said, to explain more thoroughly as we have a deadline on our hands.

In post 410, Ph0enix wrote:Which is a fair statement, but given the fact that silence and less information is, without a doubt, in favor of scum, is it beneficial to scum only?

I think you are speaking in terms too vague to correctly identify the difference between hard, mod confirmed information, and the sort of information I'm talking about.

As far as PP is concerned, if you don't find him interesting enough for your vote based on the current information in the thread, I have nothing to add. If you're town, you'd like to lunch before deadline and it would behoove you to come to your own conclusions before voting anyways.

You seem to try to be coming off as threatening and it's somewhat awkward.

Enter wrote: As far as PP is concerned, if you don't find him interesting enough for your vote based on the current information in the thread, I have nothing to add.

Of course I don't find him "interesting enough" for my vote, given the fact that nobody has voted him for a proper reason and that I don't see a problem with him on my own.

Enter wrote: If you're town, you'd like to lunch before deadline and it would behoove you to come to your own conclusions before voting anyways.

I'm not looking for someone to come up with arguments for me to use, you are dodging the question here.

In post 412, Enter wrote:You seem to try to be coming off as threatening and it's somewhat awkward.

I'm being rational here, you are the one that's trying to dodge the question with "I have nothing to add when it comes to PP, all the information needed is already present, you should figure it out yourself anyway" nonsense.

If you don't find him more interesting than the other wagons, don't vote him.

In post 414, Enter wrote:If you don't find him more interesting than the other wagons, don't vote him.

What does that have to do with...? I can't do this all day, it's pretty clear by now that you either cannot explain the vote or don't want to. And I fail to see how the latter makes sense. Either way:

VOTE: Enter

@Enter: This doesn't really explain why you picked Penguin over e.g. Arthur, whom you previously at least voiced some suspicions on, given that they both had two votes on them. You are right that voting Pine at this stage would not be helpful, but the point was for me to explicitly voice that I was pinged by Pine, so that everyone knows where I stand. Having said that, I think you are very likely mafia. I didn't much like what I saw from ETL and you haven't done anything to improve this.

VOTE: Enter

This is L-1.

Scum reading me seems pretty opportunistic and surface, don't you think?

In post 416, Mitillos wrote:@Enter: This doesn't really explain why you picked Penguin over e.g. Arthur, whom you previously at least voiced some suspicions on, given that they both had two votes on them. You are right that voting Pine at this stage would not be helpful, but the point was for me to explicitly voice that I was pinged by Pine, so that everyone knows where I stand. Having said that, I think you are very likely mafia. I didn't much like what I saw from ETL and you haven't done anything to improve this.

VOTE: Enter

This is L-1.

Additionally, I voiced suspicion on Penguin as well, and if you continue to think Arthur is not lynch bait, discussing further with you is futile.

My wagon currently consists of a player that voted my predecessor for getting defensive (which is common in newbies) and hasn't unvoted since, a player that voted me as OMGUS on a platform of misunderstandings (intentional or unintentional), a player that has voted me because I wouldn't explain to him how wagon momentum works, and a player that is voting me because he thinks I'm not adequately suspicious of the person I voted for. I think it should be blatantly obvious why I'm q bad lynch today.

I would say that I'm not getting lynched, but anything can happen in newbies.

1) Your predecessor was not a newbie. She's been on this site much longer than you.
2) Voting you isn't opportunistic, unless I'm scum and you're town, which is a huge presupposition.
3) I didn't say Arthur wasn't lynchbait. I'm simply pointing out a tension in your own words.
4) That is not the only reason I'm voting for you; claiming this is an egregious misrep.
5) I now see that you did voice a tentative scumread on Penguin, but you never explored it further, like you did with Farren. You simply left it at that and switched to him when deadline approached. Talk about opportunism.

Anyway, if you don't get lynched, I hope it will be because the town finds someone scummier to lynch. How about you tell us exactly why Penguin should be this person, given your vote? Note that the following quote is not an explanation:

In post 376, Enter wrote:Penguin's vote for this slot on Page 12 looks pretty opportunistic. I haven't seen anything from Penguin that makes me think he's not scum - his posting feels somewhat formulated, his resistance to the lack of momentum on my slot is worth a second look at later on in the game - and I think I'd be willing to lynch that slot as well, today.

I think you and I are using different words for misrepresentation and opportunistic. Conceding to consolidate wagons is never opportunistic, framing it as such is scummy. I didn't say you said Arthur was lynch bait. I'm saying I'm doubtful you think that choosing to not push Arthur is not a direct result of him looking like lynchbaity town that's making newbie mistakes. Additionally, I think it's interesting you've voiced less suspicion over me than I have over Penguin, and you waited until there was the slightest bit of momentum in my direction in the form of Phoenix before voting.

ETL has been on this site one year longer than me and one year less than dannflor. Dannflor, however, only recently started playing and in his newer games last year still made newbie mistakes.

I have been active on this site on and off since 2014 and I think this is only the second time I've seen or heard of ETL. Additionally, I've met many users who have spent years playing mafia and still make newbie mistakes all the time