A Balanced Game of Mafia (Over; town wins)

[Edible]

Votecount: Now with extra cherry flavor

Bardiche (1) - Action Dan
Sect (1) - Shadoweh
Shadoweh (2) - Dormio, Kiro
UncertainKitten (2) - Bardiche, huh what
huh what (2) - UncertainKitten, Omba
Action Dan (2) - Hanged Hourai, Polaris

[Polaris]

Edible: You have Shadoweh voting on both Sect and Hanged Hourai.

[edible]Fixed, thank you![/edible]

[Sect]

--After much, much typing, interruptions, retyping, and general frustration--

:/

Since this round is about learning to play Mafia, or sharpening skills or whatever, let me ask a question: why should I place a vote on someone, when I'm still deciding on choices? Is my asking questions not enough to say "Hey, Sect is thinking about voting for this person, but hasn't made up his mind"? What advantage does putting a vote down that you're unsure of or you don't have confidence in have over putting down a vote that clearly states "Sect is confident in this choice, and he can back it up"? All the former seems to do is just draw suspicion.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is, why is my not putting down a vote a disadvantage?


Anyways, now that that's out of the way:

##Vote Shadoweh

I'm not sure how much of that was misdirection and how much of it is actual frustration, but you definitely jumped up the ranks in my book. Part of the reason why I was delaying on making a vote was because I was still split on UK and HW, though I'm still leaning on UK.

[Shadoweh]

I'm having a hard time understanding why he got his pass in #46. His lack of opinion made him excluded from hunting?
At that point, all I had was saying he's bad for prolonging RVS. All he had was prolonging RVS.
Neither of us had acknowledged the ED1 argument .
I'm not seeing how he got the pass.

You're using the words 'gave him a pass' to make it sound like I ignored him in that post. I told him to vote someone. I voted you to get your opinions on something more interesting then him. You gave opinions (not on what I originally asked but still). He hasn't voted.

Huh what: Your case is based around how the way UK voted for you was scummy. Even if you say it's not an OMGUS, you can't pretend to be objective about judging someone voting for YOU. She voted you, you didn't like it, you voted her back and said her vote sounded 'scummy'. What I'd really like is for you to stop being so defensive and make more cases on people instead. Maybe even on ones that haven't attacked you lately. My theory is UK doesn't really have a case and she just wanted to see how you would react and how many people would jump to join her 'case' on you, hence the trollface. And Hourai was scum in that game even if you didn't know it. Try to look surprised if Sect satisfies me and I switch back to you though.

Still think she's trying too hard to seem town. Like, even harder than usual.

If I ever go through a game without this being brought up I will be a sad, sad player.

Cut by Sect voting me. Mrr.

To answer your question, no it isn't enough to just be thinking about voting for someone. Votes are a form of pressure. By not voting you aren't pressuring anyone, and they will feel less need to contribute. Your vote can be changed with a few words, so there's no harm in laying it down. It's also the way to tell what you're actually thinking, instead of just saying. Always vote in the early days, and always vote for whoever you think is likely to be scum.

So uh, do you think I'm more likely to be scum then either UK or HW then? What am I misdirecting from exactly?

[Omba]

To answer her questions, I don't have any particular opinions on Bard and Kiro beyond "they seem reasonable enough to me", which they do. Not sure what is expected here, I'm not going to start filling my posts up with one-liners on every single player if there's nothing interesting I have to say about them.

That leaves you with cases on only UK and Shadoweh right now, though. You're not really delivering on either of those and the rest of your posts are mostly dedicated to defending yourself.
Also, I at least am not brushing off your reasons for voting UK as OMGUS. If it were just OMGUS, I'd call it bad but that alone wouldn't get me to vote on you. You're basically accusing her of scumhunting with a method that might hit townies. When it's both more or less unavoidable to hit a townie sooner or later and more importantly way more likely when there's not much material to go on. Now guess what UKs method produced plenty of. Her using that method doesn't reveal much about her intentions, at least not yet.

cut by Sect

You generally vote for whoever seems most suspicious to you right now. That way you're both putting pressure on your target and taking a clear stance on what you currently believe.
If you avoid taking a clear stance, that could mean you're trying to fly under the radar and just survive. Which is one thing scum does.
And if you're not putting pressure on the one you're suspicious of, he doesn't have much reason to act, hence not creating material that might expose him if he's scum or absolve him if he's town.

cut by Shadoweh

/reading now

[UncertainJakutten]

@HH 79: Might post it shortly. We'll see who's reacted.

@Shadoweh 80: Too bad, you're not getting lynched today. That's how I roll. I like making alliances and town reads D1, whether people want me to or not. Town that's more or less on the same page is better than disordered town. Anyway, that said, the rest of your post is fairly logical and I like it.

@Omba 81: I'm not sure I understand your reasoning for voting HW. Can you explain it with less meandering? Secondly, why do you trust my promise of a case later?

@Sect 83: Thank you for your input. I actually wrote it elsewhere RIGHT after voting him, before he posted again. I think I'll be posting it soon, either this post or the next, words pending. And why HW? Because he's scum.

@HW 89: I'll be posting it, but not for you. You're more or less admitting your nervous in this post, and trying to cover it up. You're also misrepping Shadoweh, but she can handle that.

@Sect 92: I'll field this one, it's generally my thing though Shadoweh took it up this time. You should more or less always have a vote out so we can look back and see what cases/accusations you were serious about. For one, it aids vote count analysis later in the game. And two, it allows inconsistencies in scum voting/speaking to be shown. Last game was a good example of me voting quite differently than what I was saying, D2. I was scum trying to deflect the lynch off NeoSerela without actually doing so. So I was stabbing him while *actually* voting Yonowaaru. That's why voting is pro town.

@Shadoweh 93: Wrong~. Though partially right, I wanted to see how he'd react, and I even said I was.

Now, my case of the post I voted HW for:

HW's post was SO BAD. He's basically saying that Dan is overeager but Shadoweh is scum for pretty much the same thing. Not to mention Shadoweh always starts like that. Finally, the soft cover he provides for Sect is incredibly hilarious. It'd be one thing if he directly confronted Kiro on the Sect vote, but he's just kind of poking at it to see what happens and where he should fall.

384 words, motherfucker.

[UncertainJakutten]

EBWOP: Oh, yeah, and if you haven't gotten it, HW's recent posting has been fairly overdefensive. I threw him off, and he's scared.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Yay, lab class ending early. AND NO MORE ASSIGNMENTS (for now). \o/
Anyway.

Action Dan's only counter argument to the WIFOM thing is "you're being too critical."
However, having said that, Action Dan is looking like derptown to me right now.

Shadoweh is still looking off to me, it seems like she's tunnelling on Sect.
And what happened to her case against Hanged Hourai?
She just dropped it to tunnel on Sect for not having placed a vote yet when NeoSerela hasn't voted or even made a non-confirmation post yet.
Scum looking for easy targets? I think so.

Having said that, I almost forgot that NeoSerela existed.
Again. :/
Exist please.

Warning - while you were typing 5 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Argh.
I'll read further into huh what once I get home.
It's really annoying to try to read this without a mouse.

[Omba]

@Omba 81: I'm not sure I understand your reasoning for voting HW. Can you explain it with less meandering? Secondly, why do you trust my promise of a case later?

Two points mostly:
- He accuses you of using a scumhunting method that might hit townies, calling it scummy. While I see it as neutral - I can't form an opinion on it until I see both the fruits it bears and more importantly your reaction to them. Since the method is rather obvious, I'm assuming he had similar thoughts on it. But, for some reason he sees it as inherently scummy.
This basically boils down to me reading it as "leads to more material (which might expose scum)" -> "scummy".
- As soon as you attacked him, he jumped back on you and hasn't done much else besides defending himself since then.

As for your promise, I never said I trusted it, I only trusted that you'll do something besides dropping out of the game. Obviously if you're going to hide in the storm you started, that's going to look scummy to me. Likewise if you're going to wait and then jump on whatever resulting wagon gains the most traction. Whatever you're going to do will decide how I judge what you did there. Hence why I said you'd have to provide later on, but still on day 1 and not in the last three hours (, otherwise you're likely scum).

[ActionDan]

Ok, everyone's given some good input (barring NeoS.)  I will post again in about 13 1/2 hours from now.  At that time I'll make a case for bard. (even if everybody is rolling their eyes already). 

I'll just say a few quick things while I can.  I thought HH's first post after the "RVS" phase was terrible.  I thought it super funny how HH thinks I'm "uber defending Sect".  I thought Shadow liking HH's post was also bizzare. I still think UK is town.  Polaris and Omba,  I will be happy to clarify my bard case fully, but Polaris can you guess who is also using tunnel vision?  UK and Bard.  UK is hunting HW.  Bard is hunting UK. plz elaborate on this in the mean time. As for HW, I thought his first post was applying a double standard on Shadow, but I didn't read into it more.  I will later.  Basically I will focus on Bard, HH, HW, and Shadow in that order. (and ofc I will look at what comes in over the next 13 hours) 

cut-cut

[UncertainJakutten]

Well, if you read my post you'll notice I've produced. I'm also quite pleased with the reactions. I have at least one other strong scum suspect I'm willing to let rack up more evidence while we lynch HW.

Thank you for the clarification though, those are good points.

[Kiro]

UK: I'm not going to give the meta pass to Shadoweh. I don't have personal experience playing with her so by the tone of your statement, reading about her is going to send me into circles. But since you brought it up, tell me why my vote on her is bad in the context of this game.

Townies can be defensive as well as Scum. We've seen this before here and we have mislynched before here numerous times due to it. This is a null tell in my book. And a vote on this alone feels bad. Omba's in particular feels lazy.

huh what: Either someone makes a mistake on their own, or you'll have to lend them a hand. And making a mistake does not mean you're scum, it's how you go about making it and for what reasons. So implying she's trying to get mislynches this way seems at least strange to me when this method can go both ways, only depending on whether she's scum or not.

So, your first statement kind of reads like, someone makes a mistake or is baited into one. And then even if they make the mistake, it's how they react that determines whether you'll vote them. So why is the person doing the baiting not given any level of responsibility as you assumably put it in the last sentence? Is this all on HW and UK bears no responsibility despite hardcore tunneling on both sides? And looking at your #94, it seems you're letting her go now in place of HW. Is it really just the overdefensiveness then?

Shadoweh: Same last question as above. Also, why do you think of people not voting in tandem with your opinions as "defending that person." My vote was all about you... baby.

And my opinion on HW is that he hasn't been overdefensive to the point that I want to vote him. A little tunnely given his case has no traction right now. But his #89 tides me over for now.

Dormio: Vote please.

[UncertainJakutten]

@Kiro: Well, I've posted my other reasoning. Anyway, it's not just a meta pass, Shadoweh feels like she's playing a town intended game so far. I don't see what you're seeing, except MAYBE the IIoA, but it was ED1.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Dormio: Vote please.

My vote is already on Shadoweh, and I'm comfortable with letting it sit there until I can get home and read the game properly.

[Kiro]

Dormio: Yea, I was just about to EBWOP that I saw that. Page 1 never exists for me.

[Shadoweh]

Shadoweh is still looking off to me, it seems like she's tunnelling on Sect.
And what happened to her case against Hanged Hourai?

It went the way of early cases when that person replies with something reasonable, which is into the past and forgotten. Technically I dropped it to go after huh what but Sect came in with more non-voting. And there's a huge difference between someone here and not voting, and NeoSerela who hasn't been here yet to vote.

Sigh, that being said I think I'm just more annoyed at how often pressuring someone to vote lands the vote on me more often then not. If Sect's next post is decent I'll probably switch back to huh what. Can someone who understands the ActionDan case explain it to me and why it's not just a newbie trying extra hard?

Cut by like everyone ever.

Dan: Of course you didn't like Hanged Hourai's post, he's voting you. What exactly about it didn't you like? I don't have to think you're scum to see reason in someone posting against you.

Kiro: It's hard for me not to be biased about this question. I think huh what came out of nowhere on me and UK came out of nowhere on him. I find UK's intentions more convincing then huh what's defensive tactics and his desire to come back to a case that won't yell back as much. As for your vote, part of your reasoning here was based around my case on Hourai and you not understanding it. What do you think of Hourai now then?

[Sect]

Shadoweh: All right, "misdirecting" is probably the wrong word, but I wanted to get that post out, since I had been working on it for nearly fourty minutes. Basically, from your very first post, it felt like you were trying to get me onto your side by attacking HH (he raised a good point about not asking me about the Bard/Action thing), and then vote for someone, anyone. My voting strategy is kind of similar to what UK's response to my question was: I wanted my votes to reflect what stances I was serious about, so I didn't vote until I felt I had something concrete (thus, why all my joke votes at the beginning were always immediately unvoted, so that it was clear that I didn't intend to vote that way). It wasn't until UK posted that I felt that I was getting confident, but I hesitated too long, HW responded with his vote, and then things got a little messy.

Anyways, uh, the reasons I voted you: you buddying up to me against HH, especially when I felt it wasn't necessary at all, the pressure to vote, and that blow up you had against me. I was mostly ignoring it in favor of UK and HW, but then when you voted for me...

--cutcutcut--

Jeez, there's a lot of you out there. I'll read this later. As a side note, I now know that the stress I was feeling from the last time I played wasn't due to dealing with Kips after all, or at least mostly. I'm going to stick with this game till the end, but this is definitely my last game of Mafia.

[Omba]

Well, if you read my post you'll notice I've produced. I'm also quite pleased with the reactions. I have at least one other strong scum suspect I'm willing to let rack up more evidence while we lynch HW.

Yes, you have and I can agree with the reasoning, as far as a first tentative vote on someone goes. And HW provided enough reasons to keep the vote on him in the meantime.
Which of course doesn't tell me anything about you yet.

So, your first statement kind of reads like, someone makes a mistake or is baited into one. And then even if they make the mistake, it's how they react that determines whether you'll vote them. So why is the person doing the baiting not given any level of responsibility as you assumably put it in the last sentence? Is this all on HW and UK bears no responsibility despite hardcore tunneling on both sides? And looking at your #94, it seems you're letting her go now in place of HW. Is it really just the overdefensiveness then?

It's not just the overdefensiveness, it's also his reason for calling UKs scumhunting method scummy.
I'm not letting her go, I'm looking at what she does. So far I can see everything she's done as either townie or scummy, with no real dip in either direction. Hence why I'm currently voting HW, who's done one thing I see as decidedly scummy (his reasoning for calling UK scummy) and other things that might go either way, namely the overdefensiveness. That of course means if UK does something similarly or more scummy, it's going to make everything else she's done also look scummy to me.
Note that I see HW jumping on Shadoweh in that way as the kind of mistake that warrants a closer look. My reason for voting him is what that closer look produced.

double cut
/reading

[Shadoweh]

Sect: Okay, nevermind, that was adorable and I no longer want to vote you. No, I wasn't trying to get your support in a Hang the Hourai movement, I just wanted to make him talk to me. And I'm really sorry if I'm stressing you out that much. No matter how mean some of us get Mafia is just a game to have fun, don't let every attack get you worked up. Even if everyone is suspicious you're not really alone, all of town is working by your side. Just keep hunting, though I prefer not-me.

So about that huh what. Just in case he forgot I cared about him, his eagerness to drop his case on a competent player to come back to his original target if UK 'sounds townie enough about her scummy actions' makes me more then happy to continue planning his voyage off of Townie Island. If he wants to make a post with something besides me that'd be cool but this is where I'm headed right now.

##Unvote
##Vote: huh what

It'd also be appreciated if Dan would tell me what he means by catering like I wanted earlier instead of writing me off.

[Hanged Hourai]

Ok, no time for a full post before bed, but I want to say something.

Dan- ALL YOU'VE SAID ABOUT MY FIRST POST IS THAT IT'S BAD AND SCUMMY. WHAT ABOUT IT IS BAD AND SCUMMY? I was trying to help end RVS.

And don't even begin to try and dismiss how you've been defending Sect hardcore. I'm on your list, BUT YOU'VE NEVER EVEN SAID WHAT'S WRONG ABOUT ME.

You need to freaking explain these things.

Nighto.

[Kiro]

Shadoweh: If both HW and UK seemed to come out of nowhere, why do you have to take one of their sides? They could both be Townie. That is a possibility that I'm not feeling from either you or Omba.

I'm ok with what Hourai has said about others so far except the one part where Dan is defending Sect. Don't see that at all. Mixed feelings about the Dan vote. Half is on my initial gut read of Dan, but the other half is that Hourai is correct that Dan does seem to be defending UK for her. Currently giving Hourai the benefit of the doubt. More so than...

Omba: In particular, you add qualifiers to #98 and #107 saying that while you're going against HW, you're keeping an eye on UK. It looks like you're giving yourself an out here on the chance you're wrong about HW. This is pinging my scumdar, and also sets up the scenario that if HW is a mislynch, you'd probably go after UK. You're getting on HW's case because HW said UK's method is scummy and yet you acknowledge it's possible. You're tunneling as much as they are. Have you considered they could be two Townies and if so, who would you prefer to vote instead of them?

[Shadoweh]

They could also both be scum, or is that not an option today? Simply put, I don't like the exchange and I've decided which part of it I didn't like. I find it more likely that Town UK would troll huh what then Town huh what lashing out in suspicion. huh what has something like two days to change my mind.

[Omba]

Kiro:
If I'm wrong about HW, then that means I'm wrong about him. In case HW is a mislynch, I would not go after UK, given what I currently have to go off. If she's town, she might simply have misread him. Conversely, if he flips scum, that doesn't mean she's town, either. Hence why I said I'm going to keep looking at her - because she hasn't done anything yet that I can't read both ways. Either way, if HW flips town, it would make me look at least as scummy as it would UK. It would have been rather convenient for me to jump on the train UK got going, after all.
I acknowledge that it's possible UK is acting for scummy reasons, yes. What I'm accusing HW of is saying that it definitely is scummy. Though I'm now noticing that reaction of his could have been a part of the OMGUS / defensiveness, in that being attacked by her could have tilted his view of her method towards scummy. That would in turn make his defensiveness look more scummy to me, though, since presenting skewed views does not help town. So my vote stands.

Glad you brought up my lack of posts about anyone besides HW and UK, I was wondering why you didn't do that before.
Yes, I have considered they could both be townies. Apart from those two, I'm leaning towards voting ActionDan, who's still onto Bardiche for whatever reason. I can't really read whether it's derp or scummy, hence I'm waiting for his next post. As of yet, most of what I've seen from him is fluff. Which doesn't make him look good when most of his actual content seems at least very strange to me.
Then there's a few other people that made me go "huh?" at some point. Of those, HH is on top of the list. I'm particularly interested in how he'll react to whatever ActionDan is going to post.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Sleep deprived and tired post gogogogo.
Also, don't you hate it when somebody translates the exact same thing as you at the same time?
Anyway.

Firstly, I really don't like this:

Glad you brought up my lack of posts about anyone besides HW and UK, I was wondering why you didn't do that before.

Is it just me or is Omba being overly defensive?
I don't think Omba is scum quite yet, but I dunno, some eyebrows were raised.

And nobody is looking at Kiro.
He's not that scary. I think.
Aside from his case on Shadoweh, which I do happen to find myself agreeing with, all of his other "cases" look waffle-ey.
It kinda feels like he's sitting on the fence for ActionDan and huh what, of which both of them looked like they could have had wagons started on them.

I don't really like how UK seemed to spin huh what's OMGUS into "you scared, scum?" and the whole exchange between the two compounds my headache.

Uhh...
This Sect and Shadoweh exchange looks really iffy.
Note how Shadoweh acts all buddy buddy towards Sect and ignores all points made against her in the process.

Also, first day and NeoSerela is about to be prodded. :/
Seriously, exist please.

[Serela]

oh god I feel asleep super early trying to pretend to be asleep to avoid my dad that I haven't seen since I was tiny who suddenly decided to visit with gift bribes

anyway, at least it hasn't quite been 24 hours since I haven't posted yet ;_;

hiii UK/huhwhat battle

first UK declares huhwhat's shadoweh vote the "worst thing ever" without explaining why at ALL and votes her (errr wut)
Then HW votes her for total lack of a case and UK is all like I totally have a case on you I just don't feel like posting it (wtf plz)
Then as HW continues scumhunting on her, UK says HW's being "overly concerned about my vote if no one's going to understand it, though." Um, no, it looks a lot more to me like HW is less concerned about your vote and more thinking it looks really scummy. Oh hey now I read HW's next post and that's exactly what he says!

Hi UK, question here.

His vote switch was weird and felt more to discredit and less to hunt scum. Wouldn't have worried about it except for the prior posts badness.

I don't understand what you're saying here. HW didn't HAVE prior posts before his vote on Shadoweh. I don't find you meaning his vote on you instead to make sense either as you obviously seemed to be thinking something was off about him before that happened.

Eventually, UK finally posts her case on HW. You know it would have been awesome if you did that a long time ago so we'd have reason to believe you actually HAD a case when you claimed to, and so that the person you targetted actually would be able to defend themselves. People cannot defend themselves against a case that hasn't been made.

I've read the case of everyone else voting Huhwhat. They pretty much consist of "Huhwhat is OMGUSing UK for voting her." Which is completely untrue because Huhwhat actually has made a case on UK that I wholeheartedly agree with and would have made myself if I had actually been reading mafia at the time. Except Shadoweh's more recent case that I just noticed. Okay, Shadoweh's case on HW isn't horribad. I'll give her that.

Gonna stop now because of the 400 word limit, counter says I have 391. Oh and by the way ##Vote:UncertainKitten for stuff above

[Serela]

Gonna stop now because of the 400 word limit, counter says I have 391. Oh and by the way ##Vote:UncertainKitten for stuff above

To clarify on this, I'd try not to look like I'm ignoring everything not named UK/huhwhat if I had more words to talk with :V

I'll be back after school.

[Serela]

And I also feel like saying, before anyone goes and says "serela is just using word limit as an excuse to ignore everyone else", no, it's just that I feel that it's the most important thing for me to cover right now. Partially because I totally think UK is scum.

Okay I'm probably abusing the "EWBOPS can go over 400 words but only a little" rule now so shutting up

[ActionDan]

Can't post much more now (another post in 5ish hours or a little less).   Not much has changed except that Kiro/Umba seem to be throw into the spotlight a bit (and that Neo made an interesting post).  HH, I will get around to you I'd be willing to switch from bard to you.

[UncertainJakutten]

@Dormio 113: What don't you like about me being right :smug: ? Why should we be looking at Kiro? He's been posting decentlyish in my opinion. Certainly not posted anything I've found scummy. Finally, when did ignoring bad points on you become a scum tell? I think a certain scum tried to start a wagon on my with that logic in my dramatic magical return the the temple of evil mafia game.

Serela 114 is incredibly silly and not worth responding to!
Though I'll answer the question. Yes, that WAS referring to the vote on me. His first post was the utterly scummiest post ever so far. I correctly voted him for it, and decided to get some reactions while I was at it. He responds by voting me with terribad reasoning because he's scared. He was trying to discredit me when most of the rest of the town seemed to at least have SOME idea what I'm doing. One of these is not like the other, folks~

That said, don't think Serela is scum, just silly.

[Bardiche]

As far as I'm concerned you're all silly.

##Unvote: Uncretin Kitten

I never truly thought UK was town, but was hoping the move would garner discussion. I am still lost on ActionDan's insistence to vote me given the total absence of other cases at the time, but it is a nulltell more than anything, for scum and town alike vote me whenever the very first case of the day is case of A Bad Case.

And I really don't have much time, but uh. Dormio, care to elaborate the observations on Kiro? Is he scummy for having "waffley" cases, and why do you feel they are such?

I'd put my vote down but I'm running late so I'll go do that first, and vote when I get back. Stalling for time to discuss with my scumbuddies obviously no, you're silly.