[Kilava]

Anthras, on 20 May 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

I've gone through the thread to track Ruse, and more importantly to track who he has deliberately ignored. It's safe to say that Ruse has cast suspicion on every player in the game at this point.

Here's my sticky note post list.

Ruse mention:
post# suspect name.
106 Trake
107 Denul Killer
107 Ryadd+Pallid
107 Thyr
178 Denul,Trake,Spite,Thyrllan,Serc,Ryadd
299 Kilava
302 Pallid+Kilava
416 Monok [gets a brief mention]
594 Anthras
599 Eldat

Not much to get from the list at the end of the day. Monok got the least attention, but a brief mention as a possible scum. If I had to, I'd wager Monok is Ruse's scum partner, most likely the killer in hiding. As to the other partner, it is hard to tell purely from post mentions. Even ignoring Monok's potential tie to Ruse (it is a weak tie, relying on a briefer accusation than all other accusations-- ridiculous and hilarious!), Ruse has accused everyone... Some minor cases, some major (Trake, Kilava, Pallid). Ruse is clearly looking to confuse and misdirect at every opportunity.

When I was looking, Ruse/Pallid seemed most likely.

Ruse never really follows up any of his altercations with Pallid, as opposed to say, me, or Trake to a degree.

[Anthras]

Yeah it seems Ruse let Pallid off the hook twice. The issue is, if Ruse were partnered with Pallid in some way, why draw attention to him? Pallid has been pretty low key. If Ruse is symp and Pallid killer, there'd be no reason to bring up Pallid. If Ruse is killer as well as Pallid, it seems risky to bring up a brief case on Pallid. That said, the risk is considerably lower when you take into account the sheer number of cases and suspicions thrown about by Ruse. Looking back, there was never a real chance of a Pallid train taking off because of Ruse's accusations. There might be something to this, but it requires that they were willing to risk unwanted attention at a point in the game where Pallid was relatively safe. Potential risk, but high reward in that it none would assume a partnership between the two after one dared accuse the other (even if it went nowhere).

[Kilava]

Anthras, on 21 May 2013 - 12:16 AM, said:

Yeah it seems Ruse let Pallid off the hook twice. The issue is, if Ruse were partnered with Pallid in some way, why draw attention to him? Pallid has been pretty low key. If Ruse is symp and Pallid killer, there'd be no reason to bring up Pallid. If Ruse is killer as well as Pallid, it seems risky to bring up a brief case on Pallid. That said, the risk is considerably lower when you take into account the sheer number of cases and suspicions thrown about by Ruse. Looking back, there was never a real chance of a Pallid train taking off because of Ruse's accusations. There might be something to this, but it requires that they were willing to risk unwanted attention at a point in the game where Pallid was relatively safe. Potential risk, but high reward in that it none would assume a partnership between the two after one dared accuse the other (even if it went nowhere).

Considering Ruse has gone pretty much for everyone, it's a question of who he looks serious about, and who could just be distancing I guess.

Notably with Pallid, the distancing is mutual, and similar at both ends, which could suggest they'd discussed it to some extent. Both argue with each other, get a bit antagonistic, then nothing really comes of it, it's just left to fade away. it comes a little out of the left field, though that could be said a lot with Ruse.

The timing is also pretty good for some distancing - like you say, there's a few accusations flying about, so it's not going to be the only thing getting discussed and drawing too much attention. Not as much chance of it taking off out of nowehere as say Day 1. There were already a couple of bigger cases. Pallid had also mentioned me a bit, so could've probably switched without too much suspicion if he needed to go for Ruse.

It's a possibility anyhow. If Ruse was a killer, Pallid could be my choice for a partner. Trake also got some distancing in with him very early, and they've continued to be kind of antagonistic. More committed there though, so it seems a bit less likely.

And then there's the low posters, where I find it hard to really choose one over the other in terms of evidence due to the low numbers of interactions. How do you rule out someone like Denul (though the contribution there has actually picked up. Which generally is great, and he wasn't really getting the heat to make it suspicious) or Monok etc?

[Monok Ochem]

Still say its Kilava & Trake

[Spite]

Anthras, on 20 May 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

I've gone through the thread to track Ruse, and more importantly to track who he has deliberately ignored. It's safe to say that Ruse has cast suspicion on every player in the game at this point.

Here's my sticky note post list.

Ruse mention:
post# suspect name.
106 Trake
107 Denul Killer
107 Ryadd+Pallid
107 Thyr
178 Denul,Trake,Spite,Thyrllan,Serc,Ryadd
299 Kilava
302 Pallid+Kilava
416 Monok [gets a brief mention]
594 Anthras
599 Eldat

Not much to get from the list at the end of the day. Monok got the least attention, but a brief mention as a possible scum. If I had to, I'd wager Monok is Ruse's scum partner, most likely the killer in hiding. As to the other partner, it is hard to tell purely from post mentions. Even ignoring Monok's potential tie to Ruse (it is a weak tie, relying on a briefer accusation than all other accusations-- ridiculous and hilarious!), Ruse has accused everyone... Some minor cases, some major (Trake, Kilava, Pallid). Ruse is clearly looking to confuse and misdirect at every opportunity.

I would possibly be able to see this if it weren't coming from Anthras. This may be stupid(but that's all it appears I'm good for) but I don't like how this is twice now that Anthras has brought up a case against Ruse out of nowhere when we have other options on the table. I know no one is a serious target yet, but it just seems odd that he's done this twice in a row in as many days. Now bare with me Kilava, you posted some things I haven't finished replying to yet, but for the sake of argument, for now, I have you as the top choice for scum. You mentioned something about was I voting for you because I was mad, and I admit, yes I am mad. I felt like you chose to put someone down for lack of knowledge, who obviously isn't as experienced as you as your case against them. If I am able to finally get what you've "tried to teach me", it will have to be after this game is over and I see you're town and you're intentions were true. I just don't like the feel of it. It just seems "unnatural," or something. Back to Anthras. I feel like he could be very subtly trying to preemptively build a case against Ruse in case we get serious about you. Anthras would fit as your symp or partner, although he said that Pallid could be your partner, which is who I thought it might be, and said so, and so did Trake. He could be just saying Pallid to sound like he is agreeing with us, as long as it isn't you, and hopefully get Ruse lynched over either one of you.

Trake has said Pallid.
Anthras says Ruse almost definitely, and Pallid possible partner.
I think Kilava heavily, and Pallid or Anthras partner/symp.
Ruse thinks Kilava, and has mentioned either Pallid or Trake as partner.

It seems like Pallid might be the key there, but I don't like letting Kilava skip away yet *again.* I don't like how Anthras has played the last two days at all with going for Ruse twice like that, and mentioning Pallid as his choice for scum. I don't like how Monoc failed to vote, even if it would have meant my death because at least Kilava wouldn't be making me feel like I don't get the game, and I have no read on Denul, but he's contributed the least, or tied for it.

[Kilava]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

You mentioned something about was I voting for you because I was mad, and I admit, yes I am mad. I felt like you chose to put someone down for lack of knowledge, who obviously isn't as experienced as you as your case against them.

I'm not trying to put anyone down for lack of knowledge. Everyone's been there. But mafia is not really the nicest learning experience in thread, regardless of how lovely a community we are otherwise. That is simply the nature of the game, since almost anything in the game that is scummy could also be put down to a town player messing up, we have to respond to those things. And a lot of the scummy things in the game do turn out to be exactly that, which is why we end up lynching innos so often.

My case certainly isn't that you are stupid or inexperienced, but that not voting yourself is not a townlike move. Not seeing that may suggest inexperience ofc, but that is not my case against you.

Consider it from my POV.

I consider not voting yourself in that situation to be non townlike, or to be a poor move from a town player.
Now, it could be that you are town, and simply have made a move that I would consider poor.
Or, it could be that you are scum and have made that move for ulterior resaons.

Most cases for why someone is scummy implicitly give the target the benefit of the doubt. I find you scummy because you did something I don't think town would do, and I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that that is because you have ulterior motives, rather than being town and messing up.

[Kilava]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

Back to Anthras. I feel like he could be very subtly trying to preemptively build a case against Ruse in case we get serious about you. Anthras would fit as your symp or partner, although he said that Pallid could be your partner, which is who I thought it might be, and said so, and so did Trake. He could be just saying Pallid to sound like he is agreeing with us, as long as it isn't you, and hopefully get Ruse lynched over either one of you.

Didn't Anthras vote Ruse? Not sure it could really be called subtle or preemptive, seems to give a pretty strong impression of wanting to lynch the guy.

Anthras feels like he could be fake symping me pretty hard. Think Ruse pointed this out earlier?

As for him suddenly coming out of nowhere with cases on Ruse, he has seemed kind of consistent, but it's hard to tell, given he didn't contribute a great deal earlier. I agree it kind of feels like he's suddenly pushing much harder on things, and doesn't seem as middle of the road as he did at times earlier, but that may just be because he's actually posting more, idk.

[Spite]

Kilava, on 21 May 2013 - 01:34 AM, said:

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

You mentioned something about was I voting for you because I was mad, and I admit, yes I am mad. I felt like you chose to put someone down for lack of knowledge, who obviously isn't as experienced as you as your case against them.

I'm not trying to put anyone down for lack of knowledge. Everyone's been there. But mafia is not really the nicest learning experience in thread, regardless of how lovely a community we are otherwise. That is simply the nature of the game, since almost anything in the game that is scummy could also be put down to a town player messing up, we have to respond to those things. And a lot of the scummy things in the game do turn out to be exactly that, which is why we end up lynching innos so often.

My case certainly isn't that you are stupid or inexperienced, but that not voting yourself is not a townlike move. Not seeing that may suggest inexperience ofc, but that is not my case against you.

Consider it from my POV.

I consider not voting yourself in that situation to be non townlike, or to be a poor move from a town player.
Now, it could be that you are town, and simply have made a move that I would consider poor.
Or, it could be that you are scum and have made that move for ulterior resaons.

Most cases for why someone is scummy implicitly give the target the benefit of the doubt. I find you scummy because you did something I don't think town would do, and I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that that is because you have ulterior motives, rather than being town and messing up.

This makes it even worse. I thought after the night ended that you felt I was innocent, but that I still should have killed myself. Now you're saying it's because you actually think I'm scum? Should I vote for myself now? If I let you guys vote me off and you are town, and you win it for us, then yeah I did the right thing. If you're scum and were pulling my strings the whole time, then I'm the idiot-town-guy-who-killed-himself-because-scum-said-it-was "the right play." Even though it would have benefited you as much as you claim it would have helped town. Loom at the entire game thread. I didn't say much negative against you, didn't really think negative against you, and even helped sway the lynch off of you, when my vote was very important, all up until you pulled this crap. You really think I'm suppose to just see the light, take what you're saying as true, even though people lie in mafia, forget about you as scum, and vote for myself? If you had said something like, " yeah you should have killed yourself, that's what town are suppose to do," and left it at that, I wouldn't be so annoyed and wouldn't feel like you're trying to use me to win, when there's far better evidence for scum out there. But I guess scum wouldn't want to go for scum, so they focus on the weakest link, which is all I am to you, you're just being polite about it.

[Spite]

Kilava, on 21 May 2013 - 01:39 AM, said:

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

Back to Anthras. I feel like he could be very subtly trying to preemptively build a case against Ruse in case we get serious about you. Anthras would fit as your symp or partner, although he said that Pallid could be your partner, which is who I thought it might be, and said so, and so did Trake. He could be just saying Pallid to sound like he is agreeing with us, as long as it isn't you, and hopefully get Ruse lynched over either one of you.

Didn't Anthras vote Ruse? Not sure it could really be called subtle or preemptive, seems to give a pretty strong impression of wanting to lynch the guy.

Anthras feels like he could be fake symping me pretty hard. Think Ruse pointed this out earlier?

As for him suddenly coming out of nowhere with cases on Ruse, he has seemed kind of consistent, but it's hard to tell, given he didn't contribute a great deal earlier. I agree it kind of feels like he's suddenly pushing much harder on things, and doesn't seem as middle of the road as he did at times earlier, but that may just be because he's actually posting more, idk.

If he did, it was before he made his case for Ruse again tonight. I only said that after he made his newest case for Ruse, as I didn't really think so with just the previous night. After a second night in a row, yes I felt this way.

[Kilava]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

Trake has said Pallid.
Anthras says Ruse almost definitely, and Pallid possible partner.
I think Kilava heavily, and Pallid or Anthras partner/symp.
Ruse thinks Kilava, and has mentioned either Pallid or Trake as partner.

It seems like Pallid might be the key there, but I don't like letting Kilava skip away yet *again.* I don't like how Anthras has played the last two days at all with going for Ruse twice like that, and mentioning Pallid as his choice for scum. I don't like how Monoc failed to vote, even if it would have meant my death because at least Kilava wouldn't be making me feel like I don't get the game, and I have no read on Denul, but he's contributed the least, or tied for it.

Don't really like the idea of a poor compromise on a bunch of people's 2nd choice, or who they think might be someone's partner, if that someone is scum in the first place.

Pallid has played pretty scummy, and Trake makes a good point about his voting. Still don't think he'd be my first choice. That's probably between Anth/Spite or Ruse.

Ruse I feel has a high chance of being scum. But, I feel that he's more likely a distracting symp than a master. Still, if I'm pretty sure he's scum, and maybe something like 70/30 on him being the symp, it wouldn't be the worst vote, and it is D-day so any scum is kind of important to hit.

The whole Spite no lynch could just be a fuckup by town. I feel it's more likely that there would be a single unlikely combination of town fuckups between Anth and Spite leading to the no lynch than it is that Ruse would mess up as town by playing scummy for the majority of the game. Don't really like either's reaction but Anth's strikes me as worse. He seems aware of why it's bad, and just defends himself, rather than Spite who seems (or plays) unaware of why it's that bad. Still, as a single event it's the best starting point there is. It's just convoluted to pick scum out of it. Anth as Spite's symp seems most obvious. Problem is, it seems more likely Anth is scum at all than Spite...

So, my current think is that of the three:

Ruse seems most likely to be scum to be scum but least likely to be a killer if he is.
Anthras seems somewhere in between.
Spite seems least likely to be scum, but most likely to be a killer if he is.

Argh.

[Kilava]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

This makes it even worse. I thought after the night ended that you felt I was innocent, but that I still should have killed myself.

I felt that not hammering yourself was scummy, because it is the better move if you were town.

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

Should I vote for myself now?

We've already wasted yesterday, it doesn't really make a difference if you do it now. It makes a big difference when the difference is between a lynch and a no lynch.

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

If you're scum and were pulling my strings the whole time, then I'm the idiot-town-guy-who-killed-himself-because-scum-said-it-was "the right play."

It would have been the right play whether I was scum or not, and wouldn't have been idiotic regardless. Beats being town who chose no lynch over a lynch.

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

Even though it would have benefited you as much as you claim it would have helped town.

If I was scum, it would benefit me much more having a no lynch than a lynch. No lynches suck for town.

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 01:54 AM, said:

Loom at the entire game thread. I didn't say much negative against you, didn't really think negative against you, and even helped sway the lynch off of you, when my vote was very important, all up until you pulled this crap. You really think I'm suppose to just see the light, take what you're saying as true, even though people lie in mafia, forget about you as scum, and vote for myself? If you had said something like, " yeah you should have killed yourself, that's what town are suppose to do," and left it at that, I wouldn't be so annoyed and wouldn't feel like you're trying to use me to win, when there's far better evidence for scum out there. But I guess scum wouldn't want to go for scum, so they focus on the weakest link, which is all I am to you, you're just being polite about it.

I don't want you to vote for yourself at this point. I want you to have voted for yourself yesterday so that we could have your CF instead of this argument.

I am focusing on you because you did something that would be better play for scum than it would be for town.

From my POV, how can you expect me not to do that? No lynches are good evidence for scum.

At this point, I don't really care if you take what I say as true. It is, and I've explained the logic for why it is. You haven't really addressed that, just said "What was I meant to do? Kill myself? But you could be scum!".

I am not emphasizing that you should have killed yourself to make you feel bad or something. I am bringing it up because it is evidence that is worth looking at. It is a big enough thing that it isn't just the kind of thing you go "Oh yeah, you probably shouldn't have done that, nvm". It makes people look very scummy. It'd be like saying "Oh yeah, you probably shouldn't drop huge symp clues, town don't really do that" or "Oh yeah, voting night isn't really in towns benefit" or "Oh yeah, you shouldn't be wildly inconsistent and make no sense in your cases".

How nice you have been to me really has nothing to do with whether I think you are scum or not.

This post has been edited by Kilava: 21 May 2013 - 02:22 AM

[Spite]

Based on everything I've posted above, I'm going to go ahead and lay my vote on Kilava for now. We have plenty of time to discuss,and I'll be around a while tonight, and for about the last 3 or 4 hours before timeout. I'm fairly sure about my vote, though. The other votes were based on what I felt were good points made by others, but this I feel strongly about and I'd hate to switch unless there was a really good reason. The only thing Kilava has going for him is that he hasn't resorted to cussing at me or being a complete dick yet, and even though I still disagree with him, he was fairly calm about his retorts and I do commend him for that. I think scum would also know not to get angry there, and Kilava is obviously someone who's played for quite a while. If I'm wrong about you Kilava, and I really don't think I am, but IF I am, I'll apologize vehemently in SH. I just don't trust how you've been the thread leader for the most part, and everyone has been town that's died, presumably, and then you try to get me to kill myself. (Another town, and arguably you or no one knows this but from my point of view it and you look extremely scummy.)

I just want to add that I don't want to post that long lost of yours, but you said "even if you were scum that it would still been the best thing for town to kill myself." Now that I definitely just don't follow. If you were scum, you'd want me to hammer myself. You're saying that if you were scum, convincing me to kill myself would have helped town more than it would have helped you? I think you realized who I was and tried to take advantage of someone without as much mafia theory as you, which is against the rules isn't it? You're not suppose to use that kind of information. I think you got eager and too aggressive as you neared your goals, and I think that's why you voted for Monok for so long at first, and only switched to me as an afterthought. You didn't want to be on yet another inno death. That's why you and Anthras look suspicious there. As for you saying you're not voting me because I messed up, but because I have ulterior motives, that's such a crock, man. I still say I didn't mess up. Even if afterwards you really were town, you may have mentioned your views on town hammering themself, but you wouldn't go for it this hard. This just seems so bad to me, and so obvious. You say look at it from your POV, look at it from mine. If you were totally screwing with me, and I had no way to know that, and I still don't believe it, then I'd be letting scum talk me into KILLING MYSELF. I'd be considered the biggest idiot this game has for no telling how long. You're making such a big deal about it isn't helping your cause, it's what made me think hard about it all weekend. I can't find it anywhere where someone was considered scum because they didn't freaking hammer themselves. Sorry.

I've said as much as I can about my thoughts on the game so far. I feel scum can hide better if we don't put it all out there, and I think we can win this if we finally all contribute. We can't let it come down to the "best lynch choice" like it did with me. I was just the one who had garnered two votes as day was going to time out, so everyone else felt like joining the easy lynch. If we let that happen again to someone then we're going to screw ourselves. I'm not saying we should decide early, but we just shouldn't all wait for last minute while someone offers up an easy target and we all just sigh and jump aboard. Ruse is the only one who seems like he wants to win and appears to have spent all weekend looking over the thread. Kilava is also very involved, but I think it's because he's the one that's been trying to steer us into voting his way the whole game. Mockra, Kalse, and even Eldat I believe mentioned the same about Kilava. It so has to be him.

vote Kilava

That's all I have to say about Kilava. He and I can repeat ourselves to each other all night, but it gets us nowhere. This doesn't mean I'll ignore you, so if you do have more to say I'll listen, but we seem to be at an impasse, and I can't see you behaving like this as town. If the consensus requires me to switch, I will.

[Anthras]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

Back to Anthras. I feel like he could be very subtly trying to preemptively build a case against Ruse in case we get serious about you. Anthras would fit as your symp or partner, although he said that Pallid could be your partner, which is who I thought it might be, and said so, and so did Trake. He could be just saying Pallid to sound like he is agreeing with us, as long as it isn't you, and hopefully get Ruse lynched over either one of you.

I don't like how Anthras has played the last two days at all with going for Ruse twice like that, and mentioning Pallid as his choice for scum.

I'll admit that my first Ruse case came at a bad time. Bare with me, it was the first time last week that I actually had time to sift through the thread and find some evidence, and I obviously overlooked the consequences of presenting the case. I should have waited until today to go after Ruse. My case today just built off the last, and since it is early in the day I felt that it was all right to place my vote there. I still find Ruse to be the scummiest player so far, and if you've read through any of his multiple accusations you'll find that his shit, as they say, is bonkers.

And to Kilava. I have to admit that the no lynch was in part my fault, as a change in vote would have secured the lynch. I left prematurely, forgot to switch (though i still maintain that a Monok lynch was theoretically viable at the time), and basically fucked up. The only benefit we get from that day is a possible indication of Monok as scum due to his delayed vote.

It is very likely that Ruse is scum. The Pallid link is interesting, though I still think there may be something off with Monok

[Kilava]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 02:30 AM, said:

I just want to add that I don't want to post that long lost of yours, but you said "even if you were scum that it would still been the best thing for town to kill myself." Now that I definitely just don't follow. If you were scum, you'd want me to hammer myself. You're saying that if you were scum, convincing me to kill myself would have helped town more than it would have helped you? I think you realized who I was and tried to take advantage of someone without as much mafia theory as you, which is against the rules isn't it? You're not suppose to use that kind of information. I think you got eager and too aggressive as you neared your goals, and I think that's why you voted for Monok for so long at first, and only switched to me as an afterthought. You didn't want to be on yet another inno death. That's why you and Anthras look suspicious there. As for you saying you're not voting me because I messed up, but because I have ulterior motives, that's such a crock, man. I still say I didn't mess up. Even if afterwards you really were town, you may have mentioned your views on town hammering themself, but you wouldn't go for it this hard. This just seems so bad to me, and so obvious. You say look at it from your POV, look at it from mine. If you were totally screwing with me, and I had no way to know that, and I still don't believe it, then I'd be letting scum talk me into KILLING MYSELF. I'd be considered the biggest idiot this game has for no telling how long. You're making such a big deal about it isn't helping your cause, it's what made me think hard about it all weekend. I can't find it anywhere where someone was considered scum because they didn't freaking hammer themselves. Sorry.

If I was scum, I would not have wanted you to hammer yourself. It is absolutely the better outcome for scum. Why should I want you to hammer yourself as scum? Just because it means one less inno? So? It would make no difference to when I'd win the game. You not hammering would give me a statistically better chance of not being lynched the next day. Instead of the innos moving forwards and getting a CF, it would give me a free NK. Not only that, it would cause distraction on thread, because no lynches are suspicious as fuck. If scum wasn't involved in the no lynch, they will be cackling in glee at the unexpected windfall.

Mos of the people that get lynched are town. Should we just not lynch them all, so that we don't lose them?

If I was scum and didn't want to be on another inno death, I would've just buggered off the thread earlier.

As town, it is a mistake. If you want to argue that no lynch is better than lynch for town, you can feel free, but it seems like a concept that is pretty obvious for town to grasp. So the fact that you don't is suspicious, because it suggests you're scum, more concerned with your own survival than doing the thing of the most benefit to town. And so of course I'm going to push you hard for it.

Your point about me getting aggressive is outright contradictory. I voted Monok for so long because I didn't want to be on an inno lynch, but then decided to try and get you lynched "aggressively" which makes me scummy (even though you being lynched would not put scum any closer to victory, it would happen at the same time).

As for meta information, that just doesn't make sense. Again, as scum, I would want a no lynch. Also you seem to be playing the noob card, and that's not really what the rule is anyway.

Outright using meta information in cases is different from more general speculation. For example earlier, people were discussing whether Thyr was selling being a noob.

That is different to if I made a case that was:

Ruse is person X.
Person X usually plays like this.
But this game, person X has played totally differently.
We should vote Ruse.

Mostly there is some leeway. If I said for example, that I'm 90% certain I know who Ruse is (I am ), and I think they're playing oddly, I would be fine, unless the mod was particularly draconian or had specifically said he wouldn't have any meta stuff whatsoever. You're allowed to have suspicions about people's alts (and some people are so obvious it's hard not to), and mentioning that it's part of your reasoning (like gut) usually isn't frowned on. It's stuff like directly identifying people, timezones certain people are on, etc.

[Kilava]

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 02:30 AM, said:

I can't find it anywhere where someone was considered scum because they didn't freaking hammer themselves. Sorry.

I'm pretty sure it has happened, but would probably struggle to pick out a specific game. It's not the most frequent situation, but people have hammered themselves due to it being the better move for town. The theory is no different than it would be voting someone else to get a lynch.

Lynch is simply better than no lynch, particularly when it makes no difference to D-day. There are numerous cases of people being considered scum for not lynching instead of lynching. And cases of scum lynching their partner instead of going for the no lynch, because they knew they would get themselves lynched too for going for the no lynch.

[Kilava]

If you want you could ask for second opinions.

Do people think lynch is better than no lynch? Should you vote yourself for to get a lynch instead of no lynch, when it doesn't affect D-day?

In Spite's shoes I would've voted for myself. How about others?

The thing is, it doesn't matter if you know you're innocent, because innos have to play for the benefit of the whole town, not just their own survival.

[Kilava]

Anyhow, I'm off to bed.

Mainly could get behind Ruse, Anth, or Spite. Happy enough with my vote, though it could be on any of them atm.

Anth's enthusiasm for Ruse has made me a tad more loathe to vote there. It could fit easily with him being Spite's symp, going early for someone that has been getting a good deal of antagonism, trying to divert attention. You'd think someone agreeing with my suspects would make me happy, but when it's someone else I'm suspicious of, it makes me a bit wary. It's a silly reason in a way, since it shouldn't really affect what I think of Ruse, but still. There's still plenty of time, so I don't really see a need at this stage.

See you guys tomorrow.

[Spite]

Kilava, on 21 May 2013 - 03:03 AM, said:

Spite, on 21 May 2013 - 02:30 AM, said:

I just want to add that I don't want to post that long lost of yours, but you said "even if you were scum that it would still been the best thing for town to kill myself." Now that I definitely just don't follow. If you were scum, you'd want me to hammer myself. You're saying that if you were scum, convincing me to kill myself would have helped town more than it would have helped you? I think you realized who I was and tried to take advantage of someone without as much mafia theory as you, which is against the rules isn't it? You're not suppose to use that kind of information. I think you got eager and too aggressive as you neared your goals, and I think that's why you voted for Monok for so long at first, and only switched to me as an afterthought. You didn't want to be on yet another inno death. That's why you and Anthras look suspicious there. As for you saying you're not voting me because I messed up, but because I have ulterior motives, that's such a crock, man. I still say I didn't mess up. Even if afterwards you really were town, you may have mentioned your views on town hammering themself, but you wouldn't go for it this hard. This just seems so bad to me, and so obvious. You say look at it from your POV, look at it from mine. If you were totally screwing with me, and I had no way to know that, and I still don't believe it, then I'd be letting scum talk me into KILLING MYSELF. I'd be considered the biggest idiot this game has for no telling how long. You're making such a big deal about it isn't helping your cause, it's what made me think hard about it all weekend. I can't find it anywhere where someone was considered scum because they didn't freaking hammer themselves. Sorry.

If I was scum, I would not have wanted you to hammer yourself. It is absolutely the better outcome for scum. Why should I want you to hammer yourself as scum? Just because it means one less inno? So? It would make no difference to when I'd win the game. You not hammering would give me a statistically better chance of not being lynched the next day. Instead of the innos moving forwards and getting a CF, it would give me a free NK. Not only that, it would cause distraction on thread, because no lynches are suspicious as fuck. If scum wasn't involved in the no lynch, they will be cackling in glee at the unexpected windfall.

Mos of the people that get lynched are town. Should we just not lynch them all, so that we don't lose them?

If I was scum and didn't want to be on another inno death, I would've just buggered off the thread earlier.

As town, it is a mistake. If you want to argue that no lynch is better than lynch for town, you can feel free, but it seems like a concept that is pretty obvious for town to grasp. So the fact that you don't is suspicious, because it suggests you're scum, more concerned with your own survival than doing the thing of the most benefit to town. And so of course I'm going to push you hard for it.

Your point about me getting aggressive is outright contradictory. I voted Monok for so long because I didn't want to be on an inno lynch, but then decided to try and get you lynched "aggressively" which makes me scummy (even though you being lynched would not put scum any closer to victory, it would happen at the same time).

As for meta information, that just doesn't make sense. Again, as scum, I would want a no lynch. Also you seem to be playing the noob card, and that's not really what the rule is anyway.

Outright using meta information in cases is different from more general speculation. For example earlier, people were discussing whether Thyr was selling being a noob.

That is different to if I made a case that was:

Ruse is person X.
Person X usually plays like this.
But this game, person X has played totally differently.
We should vote Ruse.

Mostly there is some leeway. If I said for example, that I'm 90% certain I know who Ruse is (I am ), and I think they're playing oddly, I would be fine, unless the mod was particularly draconian or had specifically said he wouldn't have any meta stuff whatsoever. You're allowed to have suspicions about people's alts (and some people are so obvious it's hard not to), and mentioning that it's part of your reasoning (like gut) usually isn't frowned on. It's stuff like directly identifying people, timezones certain people are on, etc.

Kilava. That's not what I've said at all. I know that getting a lynch is better than not getting a lynch, (although since I've been tearing the mafia rules a part I see here where it suggests that getting a lynch benefits town always in the earlier days, but can actually hurt town near the end under certain situations. I'm not saying our situation applied, but I am saying our situation was different, in that we lost Ryadd to mod-kill, and yeah it says a lynch is better than a no lynch, because it implies town needs to use the chance to ATTEMPT to hit a scum. I had more information than your theory suggests. I KNOW my faction, and I was in a spot to either hammer myself at the prodding of possible scum, or not kill another town, from where I stood. This part where it says lynching is better than not lynching isn't mentioning a town hammering themselves in the best interest for town. I don't see this anywhere, and I've never heard of this theory, and even if it is considered the best play by some, it would be super advanced stuff for hypothetical situations that hardly ever happen, as I've never once seen a town need one more vote and therefore lynched themselves. I'm not buying it.

I've been reading over both our arguments again with a fresh perspective and it seems like you accused me of playing uninformed. This isn't true. I don't think I made the wrong choice, and I would only be able to accept this is truth once it was proven post game because this is mafia and people lie. I'm not saying I'm new. I think I know the game fairly well, at least most of it. I will admit to not knowing one thing. I had never heard of this odd/even rule, but I see where that applies, but it's saying that we don't gain an extra day had I died. I admit that I did assume that an extra town equals an extra day. It just seems logical. I was just worried that with Ryadds mod-kill and another night death coming, that's already the normal 2 deaths. I just didn't see how losing three in one day was beneficial, and I still don't. I also don't see how you claim that you didn't want a third town death if you were scum. None of this makes sense to me. Scum wants to kill all the town. One more is one less town vote, one less town around to catch scum mistakes, etc. You said you would have wanted me to live if you were scum. Did you mean me particularly because I didn't seem like a good player so far, or did you mean no matter who it had been. This is super annoying. I don't mind losing for my mistakes but I'm not backing off this one. There's no way another town death would have benefited town, but not scum as you say. So if this is true, then who the heck would realize it unless it came up before. It just seems so wrong to me, and that doesn't make me a bad player or one who doesn't know most mafia rules. Go ahead and vote me if you want for any reason, but don't accuse me of making a bad play there by not hammering. How many people who hasn't played for 5 years would know that even if it was true. Had I died with Ryadd and Eldat, there would be 7 players today, with 4 votes need to lynch. If the symp is alive, scum would have 3 of 4, and only need one town to vote wrong. How is that better than where we are now needing 5 votes, and scum having a lower percentage of total votes needed for lynch.

I'm sorry to bring this up again, but I've read over everything I can find on mafia and I didn't see it anywhere.

[Path-Shaper]

It is day 4. 20 hours 27 minutes remaining.


8 players still alive: Anthras, Denul, Kilava, Monok Ochem, Pallid, Spite, Ruse, Trake

5 votes to lynch, 4 to go to night.

1 vote Anthras: Kilava
1 vote Pallid: Trake
2 votes Kilava: Ruse, Spite
1 vote Ruse: Anthras

Players not voted: Denul, Monok Ochem, Pallid

Heading to bed, next update in 9ish hours

[Pallid]

Trake, on 20 May 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

The final lynch or end of day trains. There are two things that jump out at me. Everyone who has ended the day with a vote on Kilava is dead, and that Pallid has been on every single train and in the middle of every single train which is a perfect position for scum to be.

Path-Shaper, on 15 May 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

-snip-

Strictly looking at the finishing trains. Pallid is never the first vote and never the last. He adds just enough to the game to look like he is contributing. He hasn't really been under any kind of heat.

Vote Pallid

Le sigh. All I can say to this is that I get on to play Mafia almost every single night, at around the same times. By that point, most players are in bed or not contributing much, and I have only myself to mutter aloud to. So, to try and help, I look at the current train, see if the argument looks ok, maybe poke around or try to think of a better alternative, fail, and vote the same way as the current train.

I think the one time I hopped on real quick during the day was from my phone to try and get a lynch just the day before. I had known the night before it wasn't looking good in terms of lynching anybody, and was concerned day would end before the weekend freeze (and before I could get home to get online like normal), so made one post earlier than usual. Not that that helped, considering Spite didn't hammer.

That's all I can really say in my defense.

As for the the rest of the thread right now.. good lord, I'm going to have to think and look, we have people going in WAY too many directions. I'll be back soon.