FTL: Faster Then Light: Advanced Mafia (Sector 4, Scrapping Cycle)

[Shalako]

That red flag is also unfortunately the only sign whatsoever that you find the quotes questionable.

Is there not an obvious conclusion to draw from those two quotes?
How can one say "gut' is a poor and lazy excuse to vote someone"  and Vote someone over a wrong meta read?

I've noticed people tend to be...verbose here and i'm attempting to be more expansive then I normally am.

and no follow-up.

How do you expect a follow up to a query before people have had time to respond to it?

And yes, we do want them votes on the table in this forum. Especially since it's D1, when there's basically zero chance that an early, honest vote can hurt town or lead directly into a quick mislynch.

Sorry it's a personality trait to become stubborn when people try to bully me into doing something, no matter how sensible their reasons.
Consider my vote impending depending on responses to my questions. (of course if this post is still too long for DNA to read that'll be answer to if he's Mafia with a cliche angry town facade or how he can justify his seemly at odds statements.  )

Cut by Conq: Is it my questions that you want reworded?

Mine

[Shalako]

I read it, but I'm actually not a fan of catch-up post style walls in general since it's hard for me to get anything out of them.

They aren't for you dear.
And if you read it could you explain what  ITP is?

I've got a bone to pick with Mr.Spaceship i'll find when I have time to re-read shortly

[DNAbc]

I'd like to believe myself to be making pretty reasonable demands. I listed clear areas of improvement which you could restructure your claims to make them more coherent and understandable, and that as your post stand right now I honestly don't grasp what's so telling about 'red flags' and whatnot.

Its clearly obvious we aren't used to the same meta, but the point of placing votes even when you are not devoted is so that people will be able to easily follow where your priorities are, tally who's more likely to be lynched in case a consolidation is required, and allow players to adjust their playstyle to the changing gamestate.

Verbose? Ew, there's hardly even enough words in here.

cut by 1

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

ITP = Independent Third Party

I'm back from work and should get through the thread in the near future hopefully maybe.

[Shalako]

I'd like to believe myself to be making pretty reasonable demands. I listed clear areas of improvement which you could restructure your claims to make them more coherent and understandable, and that as your post stand right now I honestly don't grasp what's so telling about 'red flags' and whatnot.

You say

Even with that aside, 'gut' is a poor and lazy excuse to vote someone, especially when you are using anecdotal evidence between two players such as 'suspiciousness'. If  instead you elaborated properly your view on what's you consider to be 'normal', then you could've easily quantified said doubt towards the player behavior and actually give us something meaningful which we could analyze.

Here you say

The problem is obvious, Raitaki isn't really trying that hard to understand the intent behind a simple, 3 post comment involving only two players. And considering some of the messier things Raitaki had handled last game, and how I find some of his town insights to be actually very poignant, this sudden drop in the quality of his posts comes along as very out of the left field, hence, vote.

So you've attacked someone both for using "gut" and another with a false meta read.

Additionally, this ship was perturbed by your attempts to compare its posts to its "town insights last game", which occurred at critical junctions when previous information was available, to a neutral, minor question, made to gather more information in a situation where there was little.

Beyond Meta reads being simply "gut" reads why do you not expand or defend on your Meta read after it's refuted?
After Mr.Spaceship asks you to clarify a point you made in responding to my question here

> This ship wonders, then, why captain Bardiche cited those sentiments in response to captain Shalako's query on why captain SB was a Federation agent for reacting to their own ship assignment but captain Selery wasn't, and even worded his response as "Conq adequately[/i] clarified that". As a troubleshooting step, this ship requests you explain the meaning of the adverb "adequately" to it.

You simply wait for the storm to weather and instead of answering you go after murren like an attack dog again.


As an aside when you  complain about being unable to read peoples posts constantly, you might want to consider it's not the steaks fault for being tough, but rather the knife for being dull.

[Shalako]

Bone Number One

Shalako just said that he agreed with part of what I posted too, what do you think about that?

This is a blatant misrepresentation and attempt to deflect attention from himself towards me..
I said that I agree to this post for reference

> This ship wonders, then, why captain Bardiche cited those sentiments in response to captain Shalako's query on why captain SB was a Federation agent for reacting to their own ship assignment but captain Selery wasn't, and even worded his response as "Conq adequately[/i] clarified that". As a troubleshooting step, this ship requests you explain the meaning of the adverb "adequately" to it.

It has nothing to do with Murren's line of questioning at all and he's twisted a one word agree into a way to tie himself to me.

I'm a little bit more suspicious of Raitaki than of Selery right now.  Raitaki said something happened that didn't happen (and in turn directed empty suspicion onto someone), and Selery implied that he at the time agreed with Raitaki's content in general.  To me, both of these actions are equally suspicious, but my gut is telling me that Raitaki is slightly more suspicious than Selery. 

##Unvote
##Target: Raitaki

[Shadoweh]

I wanted to fit in with everything else on this page

I was just going to post when I caught up, but dissecting all these walls is taking awhile. Maybe if I open this up now I'll be able to brain comments through this. The first page is expected RVS semantics, it does give me a good impression of Raitaki and Darkninja though.  Watching them gnaw on the typical bone and start gnawing on each other is typical town/town early behaviour. I already know from what I skimmed of this page that Shalako is a seriously try-hard newbie and would deserve a medal if he's scum (patent pending for later drop-off).

[DNAbc]

[attach=1]

But Shalako, communication is not simple arithmetic! I think you are thinking too linearly, this isn't a RPG where I  supposedly 'attack' people using guts elemental spells, which is dispelled when as soon as you make a response to deny it. Mafia is a dynamic interaction amongst players, of which you try to persuade other players of your views. 
I am under absolutely no obligation to decipher your jargon and response to you if I can properly justify my decision to the rest of the playerbase.

Also, even if we put all that difficult mafia ideology stuff aside. You should've noticed already that this is a type of game where you need to convince others. And since your current modus operandi clearly isn't working, isn't it perhaps time for you to reconsider all the advice everyone has given you, and work on detailing how you came to your decision instead of throwing petty insults at me? For starters, you can start weeding out all the confirmation bias in your posts, stuff such as 'false meta call' is terrible to explain your views because we clearly are on a different frequency, everyone could've much more eloquently responded to you and saved you much frustration if you opted to rephrase your statement to something along the lines of, 'DNA is deliberately ignorant of Raitaki's questioning and instead distracted us by attacking Murren instead, that's a guilty response, its scummy!' 

Which I don't actually know, because in the statement you quoted, Raitaki is asking me to define a word. Even if that wasn't a rhetoric, it was a flippant insult, and that I can choose not to entertain that. My condolences if itwas a bit too complicated, but I can guaranteed that while I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, I am definitely not the dullest one here, and it would save both of us alot of frustration if you can treat me with some degree of respect.

cut by 2

[DNAbc]

don't jinx it shadoweh, serela selftrolled himself last game precisely because of that kind of claim

[Murrin]

So if I'm reading this right, you find Raitaki suspicious for directing suspicion on Bard based on an event which never happened?

Yes.  And as I said, it was a just-above-RVS vote.

I don't think he's actually advanced a suspicion on Bard, and given that the part you posted was a query, it reads more like he was intending to clear that up with Bard than intending to slam him over it.

To me it appeared that Raitaki was directing (slight) suspicion toward Bard, and I explained why here:

I see Raitaki "directing empty suspicion" because he implied that he didn't see anything wrong with Conqueror's argument, and thus implied that he didn't see the reasoning behind Bardiche's vote for Conqueror. And (in my opinion) voting for someone based on insufficient reasoning is somewhat suspicious. Thus, I saw Raitaki directing (slight) suspicion toward Bardiche.

(You may notice that I edited the quote slightly to include the edits that I very poorly attempted to make up above).
 

Also, Murrin, just wondering, but is there a reason for the difference in your playstyle between this game and the last? You seem much more aggressive.

Last game I didn't have any time to post (which is why I was subbed out) and wasn't taking the game as seriously I guess.  I am much more aggressive this game.  Probably just a defense mechanism because it's more intense over here than at MTF which is where I've played most of my mafia. 

But now I hate mafia so whatever

I have the FOS on Raitaki now for jumping on a really easy vote. That's exactly what Scum!Spacklick did by voting for Town!Carlington last game at XKCD. Note: this is not a strong read, just a thought.

Maybe I'll stop being so uptight

[Shadoweh]

I'm pretty sure I personally have pulled the 'that color in my role pm!' as scum, so Conq is rightish in that regard. Maybe after game we can talk about tells (I totally won't remember.)

To me, Selery's "I'm going to post later" post looks sincere.  I'm not sure I like Selery's vote for DNA though because it seems to imply that he thinks Raitaki's content was OK, which I disagree with because I really don't like this statement: because this never happened.  Bard never said he agreed that SB's confusion about his role PM was suspicious.  I see where Raitaki could have just misunderstood, but I still don't like it.

I'm a little bit more suspicious of Raitaki than of Selery right now.  Raitaki said something happened that didn't happen (and in turn directed empty suspicion onto someone), and Selery implied that he at the time agreed with Raitaki's content in general.  To me, both of these actions are equally suspicious, but my gut is telling me that Raitaki is slightly more suspicious than Selery. 

##Unvote
##Target: Raitaki

-------------------

DNA/Raitaki's argument is mostly just miscommunicating.  So it gives me almost no information.  But I am (tentatively) reading DNA as Town.

What an interestingly off-kilter post.
Considering your vote is based on the argument Raitaki and DNA are having, especially the idea that Raitaki is purposely misrepping Bardiche, how can you end off by saying the entire argument is miscommunication and has no information? I see DNA said basically this in the next post, so there might be an answer to my question later.

What I find more bizzare, actually, is saying you're suspicious of Serela but 'not as suspicious', when you also said you thought Selera looked sincere. There's no reason to think the two are on the same level as suspects for you. I also don't think it includes much comparsion thought: If Raitaki was sincere, what does that say about Serela? you spend the last part of that post actively defending Serela's reason for voting!

You absolutely cannot say that I said or implied that I completely dismissed the DNA/Raitaki argument.
Sure, you can say I dismissed most of the argument, and I did dismiss most of the argument, because most of the argument is just you and Raitaki miscommunicating with each other.

<______________< I regret hoping there was a response. This is semantics about wording. Yes, I can absolutely say you implied you dismissed the DNA/Raitaki argument, that's what your line conveys. Reading later, you say the difference between voting Serela and Raitaki was gut. As previously stated, since you went out of your way to post Serela's good qualities, this is in my opinion bullshit.

##Target: Murrin

I have come to the conclusion DNA and I are hydraing now. Maybe I should just scroll to the bottom and see if he keeps posting what I'm thinking. Oh, I've been trolled and wrong before. The odds are definitely in my favor and it's Good Enough for ED1 STRONG!

[Murrin]

Yes, I can absolutely say you implied you dismissed the DNA/Raitaki argument

You can, but it's bullshit.

[DNAbc]

I just realized there's absolutely no reason why I shouldn't be voting Murrin or Shalako upon checking in

##Unvote
##Vote: Shalako

consider my vote on either of them atm, I am inclined to temporarily townclear Raitaki for *~effort~* and actually speaking like a normal person

[Murrin]

I'll respond to the actual valid points you included in your post.

What I find more bizzare, actually, is saying you're suspicious of Serela but 'not as suspicious', when you also said you thought Selera looked sincere. There's no reason to think the two are on the same level as suspects for you. I also don't think it includes much comparsion thought: If Raitaki was sincere, what does that say about Serela? you spend the last part of that post actively defending Serela's reason for voting!

Hmm, I see what you're saying here. Good thing I didn't vote for Selery otherwise you'd be suspicious of me oh wait

Reading later, you say the difference between voting Serela and Raitaki was gut. As previously stated, since you went out of your way to post Serela's good qualities, this is in my opinion bullshit.

It was gut. Maybe my reason for thinking Serela was almost as suspicious as Raitaki at the time was shit, but at the time, the only reason I thought Raitaki was more suspicious than Selery was gut.

I'm just being honest here.

(cut by 1)

[Shalako]

[  Watching them gnaw on the typical bone and start gnawing on each other is typical town/town early behaviour.

I'm suspicious of this statement because Mafia say it when they see two Townies fighting.
Why do you think each of them is town?
How is this typical townVtown early behavior?

I already know from what I skimmed of this page that Shalako is a seriously try-hard

I'm actually fairly muzzled. Nice flow of posts so I don't have to push to drive conversations. I'm not close to hitting my stride and i'm suprised to see people complain about walls and complain about people not posting enough explanations  at the same time

  I am much more aggressive this game.  Probably just a defense mechanism because it's more intense over here than at MTF which is where I've played most of my mafia. 
Maybe I'll stop being so uptight

You gotta learn your own mafia-style. Get comfortable in your own skin and know your strong points and weaknesses.  Gotta learn what situations you can be confident in yourself in. Lots of nuances in the game to master.
Every Bird of Prey was a Fledgling once.
 

You can, but it's bullshit.

Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.

I hope DNA is still able to read this post even though I put my response to him at the bottom of this post since it's so long.
I hope he can keep track even though posts that aren't related to each other are slightly out of order unlike last time.

But Shalako, communication is not simple arithmetic! I think you are thinking too linearly, this isn't a RPG where I  supposedly 'attack' people using guts elemental spells, which is dispelled when as soon as you make a response to deny it. Mafia is a dynamic interaction amongst players, of which you try to persuade other players of your views. 

How can you say mafia is interaction among players while you can't be bothered to interact with people?
Mr.Spaceship asked you a question and you wrote this WHOLE POST instead of answering it.
I quoted it for you even.

I am under absolutely no obligation to decipher your jargon and response to you if I can properly justify my decision to the rest of the playerbase.

Of course.
It is of course  in games where the person you refuse to interact with has the possibility of being able to shoot your ship out of the sky, or was their Ability on you instead of a Mafia or is more eager to simply lynch you because of it.

That's why players quickly grow out of the stubborn toddler stage.

Rest of this post is just more of it where DNA refuses to answer a basic question because he doesn't have a justification for his false meta read on Mr.Spaceship.

[Shalako]

and apparently having a scumread on me.

One of the most vitriolic omgus I've ever seen DNA

[DNAbc]

[attach=1]

[Shalako]

I'm going to use dank Maymay Arrows so you can understand me.


> Says Player is not playing like when they were town with the wealth of info the whole game has behind them to use

>Day One

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Why are there so many words that I don't want to read?

Ok, so Dormio (super hyper conspiracy version) thinks that the Raitaki/DNA argument is totally staged between scum and scum and we should lynch them both.
However, Dormio (somewhat more sane version) knows that Dormio (super hyper conspiracy version) is totally insane so we're going to ignore that Dormio's line of thinking.
This is all followed by Dormio (conspiracy version) thinking that DNA would start an argument like the one he did as tryhard scum.
But Dormio (meta version) knows that Dormio (conspiracy version) is just as crazy as Dormio (super hyper conspiracy version) and so we're going to disregard that thought for the time being.

Out of the big discussion I felt like DNA's and Raitaki's lines of thought were fairly genuine, if not misguided.
What I didn't like though, was how Murrin jumped into the fray in #56.
Like, he says that he thinks that Serela and Raitaki are scummy.
He thinks Serela is scummy because he doesn't like Serela saying that he can understand where Raitaki is coming from and that he thinks the content is okay.
That's fine so far, except he says that this is wrong because of a statement that Raitaki made that he quoted in his post where he then goes on to immediately state that Raitaki might have just misunderstood something.
So, why is it that Serela is scummy for thinking that Raitaki's content is okay when even Murrin himself states that he can understand where Raitaki's confusion might have come from?
I don't get it.
Also, Raitaki is scummy to Murrin for the same reason. Raitaki made a post that Murrin doesn't agree with but Murrin states that he can see how Raitaki might have misunderstood.
So why is it scummy?
I also don't like Murrin sheeping DNA regarding Raitaki when he states that he considers much of the Raitaki/DNA argument to be based on miscommunication.

Dormio (busy version) thinks that Murrin's other posts don't really change my view of him.

##Disengage: Shadoweh
##Target: Murrin

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Oh yeah, I should also mention that Dormio (paranoid version) really didn't like how Murrin seemed to be trying to buddy up to DNA with all the statements on how he thought that DNA was likely to be town and how he disagreed with the cases against DNA and so on.

[DNAbc]

Shalako: I am going to False Meta Read [attach=1]


Me: [attach=2]

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Dormio (busy version) wants to note that I haven't read whatever the DNA/Shalako argument is about but it sounds silly.

[DNAbc]

Its very silly, I advise we all not to waste time over that.

[Shalako]

Man, your posts have really devolved into gibberish under the slightest pressure.
I'm not even voting you and you over react and vote me for being suspicious of you then
"I forgot I can change my vote so that's why I jumped off the Murren wagon as it built up speed but I better leave myself a way to hope back on"

[Shalako]

Shalako's  "why isn't murren doing this" Battlemap Update 2
Conq (1):, Zakerei, ,
Raitaki (1): Murrin
Serela (2):  SB Bardiche
Murrin (4): Dorian,  Conq, Shadowe, Dormio Ergo Sum,
Zak (1) : Serela,
Shalako  (2)  Raitaki, DNA
Warp Speed (1): Shalako

A ship can withstand the combined fire of 7 ships before it is destroyed.
Combat Cycle will end in 37 Hours


Worth noting is DNA having to jump off of me (say by calling it silly) to vote murren.
That's assuming you guys do the L-2 thing here?

[SB]

oh boy you guys did that posting thing again

catching up

[Shalako]

37 hours opps

[DNAbc]

I honestly don't know how you managed to leap to the conclusion that I am jumping wagons and 'pressured to post gibberish'.  I am not under any significant pressure neither from votes, and I most certainly am not even bothered by your petty insults, I have elaborated amply on every single one of my decision. Also I was the initial casemaker against Murrin and his semantic argument which still wasn't properly addressed.

Since you flat out refused my invitation to reshape your case, I feel that right now I literally don't have much to pursue, so I am just whittling away time and waiting for more player to post, while entertaining myself with your cherries

Oh, on the subject of cherries;

[attach=1]

[Shalako]

Also I was the initial casemaker against Murrin and his semantic argument which still wasn't properly addressed.

I am not under any significant pressure neither from votes, and I most certainly am not even bothered

So why aren't you voting Murren to L-2 then?
Too scared  :V

[Shadoweh]

I'm suspicious of this statement because Mafia say it when they see two Townies fighting.
Why do you think each of them is town?
How is this typical townVtown early behavior?

It's also something townies say after they've seen the same pattern thirty times. I don't have a specific post that screamed 'this is town'. it's an overall early impression. If the L-2 thing is about claims, we usually get people to claim around L-2 to L-1 depending on how crazy it gets.

Though if your votecount is right it's interesting to note that Raitaki and DNA did go from arguing with each other to voting the same person, ie Shalako. Who is a very bad vote they should both stop doing.

DNA stop posting dank memes.