Acknowledged.

Nah, I disagree. Inexperienced town doesn't expect to by lynched out of nowhere, so not voting isn't a problem with Lifthrasil's extra rules. Inexperienced scum is always worried they're going to get lynched, so doesn't want to accidentally hammer themselves.

With considering Lifthrasil's extra rules, the no-lynch is simple inexperience, it doesn't contribute to an alignment read.

Either way I want a real vote based on his reads; no more of the no-lynch nonsense.

... so they vote anyone (any town).

You think me not immediately voting for you and instead waiting to see what your reaction was is scummy? Interesting.

I stated my reasons on reads on SPF and Joe. I don't have strong reads otherwise. My reads on whom else are you waiting for?

... I have no idea how that nuance went over my head.

You're right.

I could argue that it will depend on how paranoid and careful the player is, but that's nitpicking and your explanation is much more probable.

That's not what I said.

That's not what I said.

*whistling*

Where did I say you had thrown shade at anyone besides bler144?

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

As an aside, I've seen games collapse because certain players were too aggressive with their accusations. Part of the reason I left was because the community here became quite toxic for a while. It's nice to be back and see all the old faces with some new players as well, but you need to understand that a lot of the players have a bad history with aggressive players.

As a personal, metagame request, please tone down your aggression. We're all friends here, let's try to play nice. Everyone who feels they need to leave the game because of aggression is a failure for the community as a whole.

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

*facepalm*

Do you want me to explain the poor reasoning here? Or can I assume that you're just acting scummy?

Fair enough. You're entitled to your opinion.

Just be aware that you are the only one with that opinion and we may lynch you for it.

Now here's where reading the answers to the 'suspicious' questions I asked Lift would kind of come in handy wouldn't it? The Enemy does not know they are the enemy. And Town does not know when the Enemy is eliminated by the Neutral Lyncher. That isn't a soft claim, it's a suspicion on my part that I am the Enemy and that Bler is going for a Day 1 winning move. So no I did not soft claim, please stand corrected. However Lift himself may have perhaps slipped on page 1 when he quoted the meta-cryptic quoting rule to me. Maybe he forgot I don't know whether I'm the enemy or not. Why else would he quote that rule in that exchange?

Why have you asked me to tone down my 'aggression' from my analysis, which was a reaction to the far more aggressive analysis from Bler and not ask Bler himself to tone down his aggression? What made my posting more aggressive than Bler's?

Feel free to 'correct' my reasoning.
I could get on the Joe wagon, I don't have a read to get on a SPF wagon but he is quite lurky, @SPF please post more of your reads

I quote:

"Other reads: HSL, scene seem Neutral (with a capital N), and Town feeling for bler. No strong feelings otherwise."

Whoosh. /s

Let's differentiate between two kinds of aggressive. There is aggressive gameplay, which is how bler144 started (asking questions, pushing, creating content and conflict), and there is aggression (name-calling, insults, etc.) which is what you have been doing (calling bler144 condescending, arrogant, a liar, etc.).

Aggressive gameplay is all well and good. Aggression is double-plus-ungood. Please stop.

Town is willing to be convinced that they're wrong, because they keep getting new information. Scum don't need to be convinced that they're wrong, because they're so eager to stay out of the spotlight. You do neither, which is exceedingly dangerous no matter what team you're on.

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

WRT the post merge, I saw the first one before he accidentally double-posted. Nothing has been edited, there's only been material added.

Wait. Here's a big misunderstanding. I thought you had asked whether the target of the Lyncher (if there is one in the game) would be revealed when the Lyncher dies. And to that I replied no.

When the hypothetical Lyncher achieves his goal, Town (and Witches) would of course get to know that! Read the win-con of the Lyncher role. The Lyncher leaves the game after lynching his target successfully!

I don't have any more than what I posted earlier.

ZFR, Joe and you are the ones who have pinged the scumdar most so far.

Towniest? I guess P1na, cristi and Bler spring to mind but not for any specific reasons.

I would like to see more from Joe and Ix .

I explained HSL (he's more NAI now that I found out why he RVSed Pina).
You're neutral because your constant questions struck me as someone caught in a tough role. Now I'm also considering town; either way your play reminds me of your town play than scum.

bler Town because I think a scum!bler would try and play you instead of correcting you.

muddysneakers got added to Town ironically because of his no-lynch vote. I think it's a terrible mistake, but I also think it's a mistake an inexperienced town would more likely make than scum. If you faked it, congratulations.

To summarize:

Will not vote: ZFR, scene, bler, muddysneakers

Would like to vote: SPF, Joe, in that order

Neutral on: everyone else. On this last bucket normally I'd say "Will only vote to avoid a no-lynch", but the rules mean there won't be a no-lynch. So I'll only vote on anyone from the last bucket to avoid a vote on anyone from the first bucket.

Hay, it occurred to me on my walk back from work that we should absolutely be abusing the two-people-tied-for-a-lynch-both-die rule! Double the ratio of lynches to nightkills please!
uhhhh... how do we go about organising that? I'll let the boffins take over.


No actually I'm the third scu- HAY WAYTAMINNIT

It's the avatar depicting Arstotzkan peak. I'm working on a fix - don't worry.

It may also have something to do with me turning up to the game three days late and having a short amount of time to catch up.

Or it might just be strangeness.

But this game I'm town. So the cause of the strangeness is not related to my alignment.


I don't know?? I wrote out 'hm' while I pondered about it. Maybe I was just tired, I'll continue to monitor.

Nope, the suggestion was my own. I decided to follow it up next game instead, because I went for ZFR day one game #53, and he got himself lynched day one game #54. (I spent far too long trying to remember if he played in game #55... doh...) I didn't mean to imply that it was bler's intention.

Did you italicise 'interpolating' to express playful mockery, or stern disapproval? (or some other emotion as-yet-undiscovered-by-science)

;)


Because I like the idea that this is him showing a bit of support for a fellow mafia (bler).

I've completely gone off the idea in the cold light of day. That is sprimal behaving true to type.


It's probably because I only posted three times so far, as I only started reading the game about 24 hours ago. I guess your subconscious might have picked up on something in those three posts that it thinks is a scumtell - but your subconscious is wrong.

But seriously, I'm looking forward to hearing your actual thoughts.


1) trying too hard - okay no I was going to question this but I understand you. Not trying to hard to hunt scum, but trying too hard to appear friendly and jolly and charismatic? That makes sense. I would hate to be accused of trying to hunt scum...
2) Oh bloody hell yeah. That's a bad habit to get into...


I see it!!


1. WHOOPS
2. not for me it wa'n't.

And by the time you wrote this I'd actually read everything after Lifthrasil's 'decision bell' alert, and given a more genuine vote.

AND yes, that means I voted without looking at where the current votes were standing and risked being accidental hammer, but I didn't think about that. What a situation that would have been!

I was never certain. But if they're on a team they'd have to both scum.
I've gone off the idea now anyway.

Not lurking! I wasn't here!


I'm genuinely quite flattered.

I just want to clarify the sequence of events

1 - sit down to read, see "first deadline will be tomorrow" think "argh" and panick RV supplementscene.

2 - read game, construct second post.

3 - think "whoops! I forgot to change my vote, hey look I've got a quote already"

4 - change vote and reply to you, killing to birds with one stone. Then get out of my dad's house so he can go to bed.

Oh, but you're convinced based on three posts of mine! That hardly seems fair.


----

running out of time! I'll try to get longer, but for the moment at least that's me done.
right - first on the agenda, work out a system whereby we can cheat two lynches per day.

Second - tell Joe off for trying to break game. Guys we should totally do it it would be so fun.

---

PHEWPH. Nearly lost entire post. Thank goodness for ctrl+C

/sobs

I'm sorry. I don't know if you're non-town who resorts to bludgeoning where logic fails (which I despise: see my prior refusal to play with hijack for an extended period, though I'll give him full credit - he was good last time he played) or town who just really doesn't understand the game.

If your premise here is that you're town who will happily eat a lynch if another townie dies, then no, that's just terrible strategy. The more townies who die (esp. in a game with realistically 6-9 townies) the next one standing is all the more precious.

If it's a bluff, then...ok? I mean, you're still technically wrong.

Now, Joe may recall that, in our last game together I said if cristi got lynched and flipped mafia I was happy to be next in line for defending her. But that premise was different - a trade of 1 scum for 1 town is almost always a good thing (that part of scene's overall theory is correct, even if the investigative maneuver/directing is still wrong), and besides, I knew I was town cop for the umpteenth time who was inclined to reveal the next day anyway, and that I felt I could potentially spin out of it by finding other maf if she did flip red, so I lost next to nothing by suggesting it.

But agreeing to get lynched next in any game if X flips town never helps town unless you're not town. In a potentially very short game, just no. Please don't. It's either a fake distraction or it's earnest but wrong.

[game 100% off]

I didn't watch the last game but I saw this before logging off yesterday and I've been thinking hard about this.

I think the ultimate problem here from my perspective, and probably why it feels strange to others, is that - despite the trappings - this discussion between scene and I long ago started diverging from playing mafia under the standard rules, customs, and etiquette of gog mafia, into arguing politics/religion on the internet.

I'm not sure where scene's starting point is in terms of alignment, but (to mix metaphors) he's insistent on cycling different tactics that all amount to "playing for an inside straight is the best move and anyone who disagrees is suspect!"

And I got caught up in the frustration of arguing that, no, umpteen versions of "filling an inside straight because I'm sure it will hit! is bad strategy" despite the fact that when it comes to religion, or politics, I have a strict policy of not discussing them online anymore, especially with people who clearly don't even have basic facts straight.

At the breaking point, I was willing to pause the game, try to explain - no shade, full benefit of the doubt - that playing to fill an inside straight is simply not the best strategy, period.

And he still just rejects that premise cold, and based on this post has pivoted hard back into believe he knows and understands the game best when he clearly does not. I don't even care if he is confused town or non-town acting at this point.

He doesn't even understand, or is feigning to repeatedly not understand, how the roles work despite repeated clarification from the mod and other players.

I know that makes me a jerk for pointing it out, and I'm sorry about that. My goal is really not to insult him or make him feel bad personally. We need more people who want to play, and more good players here. I don't want to discourage that IF he can learn and grow.

But I'm serious. Personally I've never enjoyed playing with that style, and esp right now my life just doesn't have space to be carrying tension/anger out into IRL. I worked on it for a long time both in-game and 1-1 with _____ because at his best he was very talented and active and I thought it could the areas it wasn't a fit could improve. I was reasonably close to ____ out-of-game, whereas with scene I'm not so he doesn't get the same starting grace from me.

I was a cocky young player who thought I knew best when I started, and I still think I was right on a few things that run counter to consensus, (mud's No lynch vote doesn't make me bat an eye, e.g.) but I know not to argue about them because it's an unnecessary distraction. And other people knew better than me on a lot of things, and I had to learn that both for myself and for the group's sake. I was wrong, a lot.

Vitek and yogs can both tell you I had way too much confidence (even as cop in both of my first two games) that I knew best and was trying to win the game single-handed instead of sharing information, listening to other views.

The arc of this argument made me irrationally mad. That's my fault.

I pull that anger/frustration out into RL, which just can't happen - it's not good for the game and all of you who are investing your time and effort to be here to have people who scream at each other, and it's not good for my life which I will have to keep living (hopefully) after the game has ended with people I love and care about and have responsibility for.

Though certainly I love HSL and cristi and some of the other folks who play here as much as I love any internet stranger as well. No disrespect to them, but I know they understand.

Scanning the room quickly, there appears insufficient interest in lynching either me, or him D1. In the bigger picture, that probably is good. I'm not blaming anybody - I appreciate everyone that's tried to calm things down or just back away and talk about other things.

If I'm not NKed N1 (I can't realistically fathom scene is ever NKed given the current gamestate ) I'm going to ask for a sub.

In the meantime I'll have to figure out how to regroup and be present to play out D1, or if I decide I can't do that I'll go ahead and ask for a sub immediately as soon as I've figured out how I can play completely ignoring what to me is the bright red elephant in the room.

I'm not trying to emotionally blackmail anyone, I'm just trying to clear the air, and also apologize to everyone and acknowledge I think I overreacted in responding to someone I should have just ignored as soon as it started becoming an issue.

If Lift, as mod, has a sub ready to go, and he believes from his authority that the best course for the group is to sub one/both of us immediately because we're incompatible and the game shouldn't suffer for that, then I 100% respect that decision.

thanks all, and again, I'm sorry for my part here.

WHOOPS also forgot to change my vote!

got a little more time, and here's bler to save the day.

I can confirm that I did not recall that! ;p

Ah dang. Just read the rest of your post bler. Sorry about that. I was just beginning to like you again. ;)


Because I think that no-one is mafia, I conclude that I'm terrible at this game (SURPRISE SURPRISE)

Okay, I don't really have time for this, but - super quick reads (in no particular order)

Bler - I was thinking of bler/scene's combat as Not Alignment Indicative, but a clash of playstyles. Bler's confirmed it just now. It's a shame but it happens.

Supplementscene - Playing very typically. If he's on a scumteam my guess is that it's with IxamYakxim, but that is a VERY tentative, barely-informed guess.

HypersomniacLive - voted immediately and had short posts, which Bler thought might be some sort of softclaim. I didn't care to read too much into it. behaving typically now.

Agent - come at me swinging with an argument that I don't think is entirely fair. But that makes me think him more town than mafia. Anybody can be wrong. (well, I guess town will be wrong and mafia will pretend to be wrong, won't they? Neutrals will be wrong too I suppose. So I guess I think mafia might not pretend to be wrong in this manner, but I don't know this player yet.)

P1na - I enjoy everything about p1na, and I would vote to lynch him.

flubbucket - much the same. Like SirPrimalform, I'm shaking off the habit of basically-ignoring-everything-he-says-because-his-alignmnent-is-public-knowledge and returning to basically-ignoring-everything-he-says-because-it's-mostly-amusing-nonsense. I'd vote for him.

Cristigale - Mentioned me without giving me a hard time. That was nice. Uhhh... what else has she done? Probably something. Would vote for.

SirPrimalform - I had a fleeting vision of him and Bler on a team, but it's gone. Now I think he's playing like town.

Ixamyakixim - not much to go on, I think. He suspects me?

running out of time... who's left?

ZFR - I'm sort of giving him a 'free pass to survive day one' to be honourable? I dunno.

muddysneakers - sorry for forgetting you! I like his posts and he's a new player, so he can fight over ZFR's pass.

---

okay, that's me done for reals this time. Sorry I've got such limited time. I'll keep thinking about the game while I'm away.

DAMN almost forgot again!

vote P1na

I can't give a decent reason now, but I'd hardly expect decent reasons from anybody at this stage.

No. I will not use my authority to force-replace anyone because of incompatibility. It's up to you to decide whether you are compatible or not. If someone asks for replacement, I'll accomodate that. But I will not reduce our playerbase further by declaring incompatibilities. Also, I really don't want to replace anyone unless really necessary. I urge you to try to get along. Read Rule 4 again, take a deep breath - and then lynch the hell out of each other, if you want. But stay civil.