Mafiascum.net

Vote Count 1.2

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

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 33, Etromin wrote:

In post 32, Draynth wrote:VOTE: Etromin
Serious vote

Um... are you going to elaborate on that?

Probably not

In post 18, Ircher wrote:I would like to point out that the healthiest game state is an active one.

So, how about we start by giving some reads? Currently, I scumread Vulcan for their town read on Crepppy as well as joining the ever popular Haram wagon.

VOTE: Ircher
You don't buy vulcan having a strong townread on Crepppy for it, I don't buy you not getting that vulcan wasn't serious

@Crepppy, do you think vulcan logician is scum for "scumreading" you?

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.

"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.

Who said anything about putting him to l-1?
He has 2 votes on him

Harambe has a point. Wagoning him when he's gone is pointless.

I mean it's only a day, I'm happy to leave my vote there unless something else piques my interest

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.

What I mean by that was:

When someone is V/LA, then putting even two votes on that person (instead of 4 at L-1) will
1: Give about the same reaction as when he has 4 votes, a.k.a. from 0 to 2 votes after V/LA will make Ircher say about the same thing as from 0 to 4 votes.
2: Eventually get Ircher to L-1. Even if it's L-3 now - 2 votes - there will be some people that will state that 2 votes isn't pressuring Ircher enough as he's not responding to it and they want more pressure by putting him to L-1.

If you want to put your vote on Ircher, fine, but while Ircher is V/LA we can better pressure someone else in the meantime. Otherwise we just wait until Ircher is back and see what happens then. Before Ircher returns we should probably vote someone else since we got enough time for that. When Ircher comes back we can always put our votes back on him, but this way we're pretty much wasting our time.

Also, looks like I can forget about my initial strategy to take it a bit easier this game. I'm not gonna be one of the low-posters rn so yeah, screw that, I'll probably be more active from now on but without any sort of strategy I just have to see what happens next.

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.

Townies can be opaque for good reason tho. Maybe they have a PR. Maybe they are baiting scum by saying something intentionally misleading. Jus sayin'

In post 59, Harambey180 wrote: When someone is V/LA, then putting even two votes on that person (instead of 4 at L-1) will
1: Give about the same reaction as when he has 4 votes, a.k.a. from 0 to 2 votes after V/LA will make Ircher say about the same thing as from 0 to 4 votes.

Disagree

In post 59, Harambey180 wrote: 2: Eventually get Ircher to L-1. Even if it's L-3 now - 2 votes - there will be some people that will state that 2 votes isn't pressuring Ircher enough as he's not responding to it and they want more pressure by putting him to L-1.

Like anyone that says that is getting hard scumread by me, what's the issue?
Wagons aren't just about pressuring the person being voted, they're as much about gathering information on who will / won't jump on.

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

In post 46, Etromin wrote:

In post 39, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 30, Etromin wrote:I'm not really sure the wagon here is actually putting pressure on, though, because it's clearly a pressure wagon surely that defeats the purpose?

Was this a response to ofrhz's #23?

No, post 24. Can't quote easily on phone, but it said something about Harambey's wagon being there to elicit a reaction.

I wasn’t expecting Harambey to write an essay explaining why he’s town. I just wanted to see what he would post in response to a wagon on him.

He didn’t really respond to the wagon. I can see newbscum not knowing how to respond. But since Harambey is an SE, scum!him probably wouldn’t clam up out of fear here so I’m thinking it’s NAI

Getting townvibes from Draynth

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.

Also, if you think scum will jump on the wagon why would you attempt to stop that?

Well I totally don't agree with that the way you make your post on voting at RVS is in any way AI but at least it's getting us somewhere. Something to discuss about and therefore something that could give us actual alignment indications.

Some people don't say anything besides their vote; some people say things like 'hello' (like Alciel) or something else along the lines of 'i'm here, good luck everyone'; some people give a 'reason' why they vote that person but it's never really an actual motive to vote that person without it being random (I've had things like 'the zoo wants you', and in this game, 'let's get this monkey'). I haven't done any sort of analysis on opening posts but I find it hard to believe that scum random-vote in a different way than Town.

But hey maybe other players have something else to say about it. Me not really besides this. For those that want to argue about this and start a discussion: good, discussions are helpful. Though the discussion would be more to look at the reactions than to actually look at 'awkwardness' in the opening vote's posts.

P-edit: I wasn't expecting it myself either .
Personally, I don't think I have to fear for wagons that are there because of RVS mostly. And I had the intentional plan to not speak up too much that scum will use it for making me suspicious like last game. In that last game, I did get wagoned as well. It was near the deadline though and I hadn't planned on not saying too much. That freaked me out a bit and eventually I got lynched. This wagon is different in all aspects, so is my response I think?
But when I saw I got wagoned, I thought I better spoke up anyways so we can get this started, if you know what I mean by that. Seems like it does, but we don't have everyone yet.

P-edit #2: That is indeed a good point. I'm attempting to stop it, or at least, slow it down, because Ircher is V/LA so in the time he is gone we can better pressure someone else instead of waiting. If this wasn't the case I wouldn't have tried to stop it, but on the other hand it would resolve itself because Ircher wouldn't be V/LA and respond quick.

Like I'm not saying you're flat out wrong, you're correct that it's more useful to work with players who are here, I just didn't notice he was V/LA at first and even then he's only gone for a day, it's not that big a deal in my opinion.

Besides scumreading Alciel for awkward posting, do you have any other reads?

In post 68, Draynth wrote:Like I'm not saying you're flat out wrong, you're correct that it's more useful to work with players who are here, I just didn't notice he was V/LA at first and even then he's only gone for a day, it's not that big a deal in my opinion.

Besides scumreading Alciel for awkward posting, do you have any other reads?

ofrhz: I like his contributions. He's active and keeps it going.
Etromin: I'm putting Etromin at neutral for now. Would like her to post more and make them longer. One-line posts are hard to read (for me they are).
crepppy: He's prodded so it's hard to say anything about it.
vulcan logician: He makes odd decisions which I don't understand and he seems to either be all over the place or follow what others do. He's a newbie player though so I guess I have to forgive him for that for now.
Alciel: d.n.a.
Draynth (you): You're active and asking the right questions. Though when you're not asking questions you're mostly disagreeing. Which, I think, is actually not that bad because disagreeing usually means people will speak up more. I appreciate your effort so far.
Ircher: The one who struggles with voting. His post #18 is good but came way too soon. His other posts, meh, Ircher is a neutral for me rn too.
Nachomamma: He was very active for like, 1 1/2 hours. I think his posts are too long to actually bring across a point and to ask 'good' questions (as in: we see them). The "does any of this makes sense?" in post #37 is outright hilarious. Then finished off his extremity of activity with 'if I'm too inactive lemme know'.

In overall: The ones that have been more active in general I have more trust and confidence in.

In post 51, Draynth wrote:

In post 33, Etromin wrote:

In post 32, Draynth wrote:VOTE: Etromin
Serious vote

Um... are you going to elaborate on that?

Probably not

As far as I can tell, you put an unprompted vote on me, claiming it was serious, and now you're not going to explain the reasoning and instead switch to someone else? This seems kinda weird to me, but I'm currently reading it as an attempt at a working pressure vote by pretending it was serious. If not, I'd definitely like to get an explanation on this.

In post 69, Harambey180 wrote:[quote="In
I'm putting Etromin at neutral for now. Would like her to post more and make them longer. One-line posts are hard to read (for me they are).

Sorry about that. I generally post from my phone when I get breaks during weekdays, but with a bank holiday weekend coming up, I should be able to post more regularly and with longer posts.

In post 70, Etromin wrote:

In post 51, Draynth wrote:

In post 33, Etromin wrote:

In post 32, Draynth wrote:VOTE: Etromin
Serious vote

Um... are you going to elaborate on that?

Probably not

As far as I can tell, you put an unprompted vote on me, claiming it was serious, and now you're not going to explain the reasoning and instead switch to someone else? This seems kinda weird to me, but

I'm currently reading it as an attempt at a working pressure vote by pretending it was serious

Pretty much this, I was happy enough with how you reacted

In post 34, Nachomamma8 wrote:
Other fairly equivalent votes I could see myself making are Alciel and creppy. I don't believe that either have them have done more than the bare minimum to play the game, which is sometimes a sign of scum who is uncomfortable.

This feels like a very weak read esp. coming from the IC. To clarify, I mean that I would expect a more thorough or convincing reason why you. would support wagons on those you named. But, it is early game, so honestly, there isn’t much to go by, but still, I expected some higher quality reads than “they are not doing anything and are likely lurking scum”.

In post 36, Nachomamma8 wrote:

In post 10, vulcan logician wrote:

In post 5, Etromin wrote:Random

Vote: crepppy

for having too many Ps in their name.

I think bold is okay to use, but just FYI (since it's your first game) you can use vote tags too... type:

Code: Select all

 [vote]"the person's name"[/vote] 

.

You may have already known, but just in case you didn't, now you do.

VOTE: your vote here[/ v] (without spaces) also works, for the record.

In post 18, Ircher wrote:Currently, I scumread Vulcan for their town read on Crepppy as well as joining the ever popular Haram wagon.

1. I'm assuming that you find Vulcan's townread on crepppy scummy because it's a weak and unsubstantiated one. What do you think Vulcan as scum gains from faking that specific townread? In general, I'd imagine scum fake townreads in order to fake scumhunt and blend in; do you really think that Vulcan as scum thinks that people will read his townread on creppy for picking up on the obvious scumtell that is "having a space in his username" and buy it as an earnest and genuine piece of scumhunting?

In post 23, Ircher wrote:Ah, you are right about the wagon. Still, the reason you gave for townreading Crepppy is one I strongly disagree with, especially when you assert they are obvtown. Also, only you stated that Crepppy was obvtown. If we were talking a light townread, I could buy that; however, I do not buy a hard townread on someone based solely on a comment made during RVS.

2. Vulcan's initial statement was that he leaned town on crepppy, which qualifies as a "light townread to me". Why did you scumread it if the reasoning was something that you could believe? Do you disagree that his initial read on crepppy was a light townread or am I missing something here?

I also have trouble believing that you could buy a light townread on crepppy for that reasoning. If the reasoning is genuine, then it's absolutely atrocious and is on par with the worst reasoning I've ever seen - I just heavily doubt that it's genuine.

1. Well, yes, that is what it basically amounted to then. And no, I didn’t think people would buy it. At the same time, you never know with newbies, so it really doesn’t hurt to look into things like that a little closer. There are, after all, those who play the “newbie town” card.
2. You are right in a way, but again, I wanted him to clarify his read strength. Newbies don’t generally play like experienced players; they are much more volatile and do stuff that doesn’t make sense. Given the game state then, yes, such a read is atrocious, but that does not mean I cannot buy it from coming from town.

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.