Mini 760 - Bleach Mafia: Karakura Town - Game Over!

[Giuseppe]

Vote PhillyEC

for dominating the town too much in another game.

[Giuseppe]

Wait, LHNM is in this game?

Unvote

Vote LynchHimNotMe

for the most reckless quick-hammering I've ever seen, even if it won us the game.

[Giuseppe]

And if they had been town, or our cop? You didn't seem to willing to let either of them claim, or even defend themselves, especially because they were going to be replaced.

Regardless, that recklessness earns you my auto-suspicion...

[Giuseppe]

Well, it was just the basis for my random vote, but to justify it, he did it on two players who never got a chance to defend themselves, or roleclaim, and both were scheduled to be replaced... Within the context of that game, those aren't hammers I would have dropped, without at least the claim. Furthermore, he didn't contribute much to the discussion before either move.

With that meta in the open, I'll

Unvote

. I'd like to caution people against putting others on L-1 if they have any hesitation about that person getting lynched. Expect quick-hammers.

[Giuseppe]

Everyone gives a good random vote some kind of clever justification. As for auto-suspicion, if I said it wasn't I'd have been lying. No, rather, call it a bit of uneasiness about having him in the game to begin with. Perhaps not suspicion, but certainly a tingle of fear that he might not be as lucky as he was last game.

[Giuseppe]

And, well, I drew a reaction, didn't I? The main goal, I suppose, was to put my experience with this particular player out there. However, I have no proof he's scum, and having accomplished the goal of establishing the meta, I've unvoted, and from here, I'm going to launch future discussion from how people criticize/critique my move.

[Giuseppe]

Assuming item X is my move to reveal meta of LHNM, than I'd be taking discussion forward based on discussion of how I did it.

And, well, yeah, random votes do stink, I suppose. but they're the best we've got.

[Giuseppe]

I want to know what GLaDOS and Philly are thinking, to be honest. Say what you're thinking as you think it, or you may never get the chance to say it. That said, I see no reason to withhold the information, because if we could get more opinions on scum, than we could have more discussion, and thus, a better lynch.

I don't like the idea that Phil is trying to read GLaDOS's mind here:

I think I know why you're voting for Green Crayons, Glados. And IF its for the same reason(s) as to why I'm suspicious of him then you're pretty quick to notice. The fact that you dont want to reveal your reasons yet further makes me think we're on the same line of thinking here.

That feels off, and weird. And suspicious. I don't see anything really wrong with GC right now. You can't lynch him if you don't have support. Explain your viewpoint.

On the topic of Korlash, I feel he has been doing a bit of word-twisting, and that in order to prove he's been twisting the words, GLaD AND Phil should explain why they don't like GC.

[Giuseppe]

Well, the reason I haven't had a chance to speak about it is because the town has taken a more organic, more useful path of discussion. While I was setting up a discussion, should one not occur naturally, this line of debate seems far more interesting than I can construct from that old idea.

That said, let me way in on the issue at hand:

I believe that the root of GC's argument against my actions lies in semantics. To me, the RVS isn't a defined place where people simply vote, and watch things go forward. The RVS is a time for experimentation: looking for the best way to take the town out of the RVS. That said, one should always look for new, more effective ways to launch the town discussion forward.

I decided that employing the use of meta would be a useful tool to push the discussion outwards. It seems that, inadvertently, I succeeded in causing said debate to occur through discussion of my use of meta in the RVS. I excused my action as random because the RVS is random in name only. Everyone pretends it's random *Hence why it's call the Random Voting Stage*, but it can't possibly actually be random. Calling it random was a way to plug it into the RVS, and start discussion. It would have been more suspicious not to call it random.

Thus, the cause you look for that make my vote not be random is the desire to push the Town out of the RVS. At the root, that was my intention. Not much else to say about it.

As for my own suspicions, I find that Korlash's method of trying to GLaDOS to explain her suspicions was quite questionable. All I had to do was ask that s/he explain it. I find that he instantly went to twisting his/her words to be a very odd, scummy choice to make, when the easier alternative would have been to ask.

[Giuseppe]

You kinda sorta took it out of context. My entire point is that everyone calls it random. Please refer to the lines just above it:

I excused my action as random because the RVS is random in name only. Everyone pretends it's random *Hence why it's call the Random Voting Stage*, but it can't possibly actually be random.

As for saying it was to look less suspicious, well, that's the MafiaScum Gaffe of the Year.

While I can't just wish I hadn't said it, I'll do my best to explain. At best, I'm weak when it comes to defending myself. I don't like the spotlight on me, especially when I'm town, because I'd fail at successfully redirecting the point to the real scum.

So yes, it feels Wrong. And off-key. And decidedly different. But I'd argue that for the sake of experimentation, it was a good move to make, even though I'll pay the price for it now. Yes, I suppose it was 'lying', although I didn't consider it that way. The benefits of quick discussion outweighed the risks of trying something unorthodox.

[Giuseppe]

Alright, I'll do my best to answer every comment directed at me. If I leave something out, please tell me, as I'd hate to ignore you.

@GLaDOS's Post 82-

Well, for starters, I've only finished one game on MS. The rest of my Mafia experiences lies on another site, which due to that site's policies on who can join, I cannot link to. I apologize for the inconvenience, sincerely, but I can't provide you any examples.

To your second point, I say especially when I'm town because of the difference in mindset that I can carry into the game as each role. As a townie, if I'm being targeted, the only thing I know for a fact is my own innocence, and I know that the scum could be entrenching itself as 'pro-town' figures while the town misguidedly thinks that I'm the bad guy. This leads to a sort of franticness, generally, to find the real scum, a franticness I am not yet feeling, but may feel in the near future, should I near closer to a lynch *I will constantly be striving towards over-coming this particular flaw in my playing style, please note*.

As scum, though, it's a bit different. Perhaps it's a cool confidence of knowing whose town and whose not? There's something about approaching an interrogation from the scum point of view that is much more easily dealt with, in my mind. For instance, it'd be easy to frame another townie who was perhaps too aggressive in his pursuit of a weak case on me. If I was a townie, and in the same position, how would I know if I was really derailing discussion to scum? A mistake like that from a Town player like myself would certainly doom me the next day, while as scum, the NK allows for more influence over who is allowed to speak.

Anyway, I hope that compensated for my inability to post examples, but that's sort of the difference in mentality that I carry into games.

To GLaD's last point, well, I was going to start discussion either way, if it didn't kick off. I was laying the meta as foundation, seeing if I could draw a response from LHNM, and overall seeing how putting meta out there might effect the progression of the RVS. One shouldn't just decide that discussion will be about one thing or another before it happens. It should be an organic transition from RVS to real play, and it should be as minimally contrived as possible. That said, I had a rough plan, but I wasn't going to force the conversation.

@Korlash's 83- I didn't see anything really vague about what I was saying. I said that the way you phrased your question wasn't effective, and you were twisting GLaD's words, which seems a very anti-town way to get the answer out of her. If the town had pressured, GLaD would have answered, and that's what happened. The urge to go to subterfuge first is scummy, in my mind, but not terribly so.

@ABR's 85- You need to Unvote first. That said, wow. You don't have any further input at all? Speaking is pro-Town.

@Zwet's 72- I hadn't actually seen this when I was reading the topic before, but upon seeing the quote in Phil's post, sirens went off in my mind. Zwet doesn't normally wait to hear other people's opinions... This is massively out of character. This seems to me like scum who want to hear a Townie's PoV before latching on and repeating the same argument, thus clearing themselves.

Of course, then again, after seeing Zwet's post, I thought of ABR's most recent post, and saw how they were quite similar. Both in the severity of their condemnations of their respective targets, and also the seeming lack of their own arguments to bring to the table.

FoS: Zwet and ABR

I'd like to hear a little more from both of you.

[Giuseppe]

ABR, are there any specific reasons why you feel Erg0 won in our debate?

[Giuseppe]

Scummy actions I'll admit. 'Lying' is never good. It should have occurred to me at the time I was concocting my discussion starting plan. However, it was not done with the intent of harming the town. If anyone could point out one way in which my 'lie' damaged the town, I'd like to see it.

The goal, as I stated, was discussion. The result seems an obvious success.

So, you can decide whether 'lying', as you call it, to start discussion was a bad move, or whether it can be, I would not say excused, but perhaps put on the back burner in light of a more fruitful discussion.

I myself don't have much more to say about it, other than it was experimental, dangerous, and successful, but certainly had, and has, the potential to end in lethality for myself.

*On a different note, you can be sure that I'll be refining this idea in the future, it's too good an idea to pass up. First thing I'm throwing out is the fib portion of the trick. O.o'*

[Giuseppe]

Noted.

[Giuseppe]

As for me, I'm not quite sure what to think yet. I'm going to reread, and see who of you is more in the right.

[Giuseppe]

Mod: I'll be V/LA until Monday night. My apologies for the inconvenience. I will try to post if I can, but the V/LA will not go away until Monday night for sure.

[Giuseppe]

I'm back, but I haven't had a chance to read anything yet. Jet lag is horrible... I'll try to read everything over tomorrow.

[Giuseppe]

Alright, so here's my clarification on 'Lying is Never Good'.

Nowhere in my post did I ever advocate lynch LAL, please keep that in mind. I said lying was never good because the truth should never be hidden from the Town. When the truth is told, everyone wins: both Town and Scum. Ideally, we'd like not for the Scum to win from our honesty, but it's unavoidable. If a person lies in the hopes of tricking the scum, however, I'd argue that the Town loses more from a Town lie than the Scum lose. The Town are naturally more suspicious, and don't like being lied to. If a pro-Town player lies, than the Scum, should that lie be revealed, can hop aboard and use LAL as an argument.

What makes lying a dangerous situation is that Town players use LAL too, allowing Scum to blend very well, and get away with lynching a Town player.

In that regard, I say that lying is not good for the Town, but simultaneously LAL is not good, because it allows Scum to blend, and makes too much room for error in lynching.

Does that clarify at all?

As for my own suspicions, I find Zwet the scummiest at the moment, with his weird waiting on Philly for the opinion, as well as his approval of Philly as a pro-town player. This feels to me like Zwet manipulating Phil onto his side, and the 'pro-town' flattery in Zwet's posts after their little scuffle on page 7, on top of Zwet's odd tie to Phil *IE waiting for his opinion, and the pro-town remarks so soon after he (Zwet) finished suspecting him (Phil)*

He's spent more time discussing why he feels Phil is pro-town than he has explaining why GC is scum.

His fixation on Phil leads me to be perfectly comfortable with a:

Vote: Zwetschenwasser