Magic: The Gathering Mini Mafia

On May 22 2012 10:18 VisceraEyes wrote:


Attn: Zelblade, Acid and MouldyJeb

It has come to my attention that you signed up for a game only to post one time and then disappear for half a day. In keeping with my meta, I'm in favor of lynching lurkers if no scummy candidate presents himself, so consider this my final warning. I will not hesitate to vote to have you lynched today, as all three of you have exhibited at least tertiary interest in this game since it has started and all three of you are now absent. I find this to be far scummier than Nova's posting (who my vote is on now).

On May 22 2012 10:24 EchelonTee wrote:
Of those three I would most support Acid dying, just chiming in
.

On May 22 2012 18:05 zelblade wrote:
Acid so what do you think of nova now? Why is marvellosity buddying with nova a scummy thing to do?

On May 22 2012 19:01 marvellosity wrote:


Apparently you can't read. Well done you.

On May 22 2012 06:03 marvellosity wrote:
##Vote: Mattchew

I just can't bear it.

On May 22 2012 06:03 marvellosity wrote:
To be clear: this is absolutely a policy lynch.

On May 22 2012 02:46 marvellosity wrote:
I don't think I'd agree to a Nova lynch unless something very particular came up. Atm he's playing to his not-very-useful town meta rather than his post-extensively scum meta

On May 22 2012 07:27 marvellosity wrote:
Guys. Look at Nova's filter in LIV where he was also town (and where I won on your behalf, Katina dearest). Very similar. Not convinced by his lynch at all.

On May 22 2012 21:08 marvellosity wrote:


How is it different from LIV? Quite a few posts but generally not a lot of content, no?

For now I'm going to answer 'who I'm suspicious of' as 'who I'd like to be dead'. So other than Matt, Nova, Acid, and to a lesser extent Jeb.

On May 22 2012 21:26 Zealos wrote:

I'm pretty sure the 2nd part is the reasoning, its a policy lynch against an annoying posting style that isn't helping town.

On May 22 2012 23:15 Tunkeg wrote:
Questions

@acid
How do you think WBG, VE and Katina have played thus far? They are all in on a NT case, what do you read from this?

On May 22 2012 02:46 marvellosity wrote:
I don't think I'd agree to a Nova lynch unless something very particular came up. Atm he's playing to his not-very-useful town meta rather than his post-extensively scum meta

On May 22 2012 21:30 marvellosity wrote:
Why? Because useless townies are useless and make easy lynch bait. Ideally I'd want someone to shoot Nova tonight.

On May 23 2012 03:10 HiroPro wrote:
Acid: You say that you suspect marvel because he initially defended N_T, and then tried to distance himself. But that would would mean that you think they are both mafia. So then, why is it that you feel that the case on N_T is "too easy", but Marvel is a good candidate to lynch?

On May 23 2012 07:12 marvellosity wrote:


Don't be silly dear, I'm not important enough to shoot

On May 23 2012 07:16 EchelonTee wrote:
yeah acid is scum lol

On May 23 2012 07:32 EchelonTee wrote:
Acid I think ur scummy because

1. lurking for much of the beginning of the day. average scum trait

you don't go for anyone until things have started chugging a long. in a mini like this, scum are going to hide around a lot. they probably goign to have a few active members, but the way you've been lurking, not pushing things or being provocative (save for your one single minded focus) seems like u want to avoid the spotlight, like ur disinterested in extensive scumhunting.

2. using faulty logic to push someone, crutched upon by a few points of decent logic. common scum trait

ur initial reason for being susp. of marv was "voting w/o logic and buddying with nova" wasn't good at all and felt fake, just cuz u needed to vote. first point isn't true, second one isn't inherently scummy. ur later point of marv's change of opinion on NT is a decent point, but it looks like ur just trying to build and build and build a rolling case instead of actually try and re-examine ur case.

it's prety common for scum to pick a candidate to tunnel for, preferrably one that isn't immediately going to be lycnhed, It makes you look constructive, but you don't take the blame for townie lynches if the lynch doesn't go through

3. didn't mention jeb at all. scum don't want to talk about mislynches as much as possible

when there's a townie mislynch, scum often are one of the random single voters on other people (citation: Ver's Mafia guide). Most townies want to consoliidate a strong lynch so will focus on a few candidates. Scum would rather avoid the town bandwagons. The only townies who stay off the main candidates are especially stubborn players (Toad, VE), and I don't get that vibe from you

On May 23 2012 08:01 EchelonTee wrote:
why do people always say "if you actually read my posts blah blah blah"?

we're all over the 5th grade right? it's easy as fuck to read things. it's really hilarious how your response is "no ur wrong read my posts"

and OMFG can't you people REASON??????? look this is what you wrote



you said "marv voting without reasoning". he HAD REASONING; you explained it right there in your posts! is it shitty reasoning, sure! but you fcking outright lied when you said "marv voted without reasoning"

why is everyone so derp? AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

On May 23 2012 20:17 froggynoddy wrote:


Yeah but useless stuff in terms of scumhunting.

I have been inactive due to work and sunny weather. Have been catching up on the thread this morning. I unfortunately did not get to put my vote off Katina as I only got back to the thread post lynch. If I had done I would have probably voted N_T.

@VE: Perhaps I'm being thick but are your suspicions on WBG simply because you think he's been dodging you? That seems an exceedingly stupid thing to do as scum no?

@Acid: Are you still confident on a marv lynch? Your case on him seems like the strongest so far (which still isnt much tbf).

On May 23 2012 21:39 marvellosity wrote:
EBWOP: if you seriously think I'd push something like that as mafia, you're out of your mind.

On May 24 2012 07:19 wherebugsgo wrote:
You bore me.

Acid who would you kill today?

On May 24 2012 14:51 Navillus wrote:

Acid~

My biggest scum-read right now is in fact Acid. Looking through his posts the first thing that jumps out is simply lurking. He has been lurking this entire game, with few posts, even fewer posts of any significant length by him, and even fewer posts in which he is directly addressing or responding to others, something scum love as they get to look like they're making content without ever calling anyone out or putting themselves in a situation where they might get directly called out.

In a similar vein what content he has had has been the same in almost every single post, him tunneling acro/marvel. This tunneling began at the start of the game and hasn't abated, this is very big as it means that he gets to look like he's giving reads the whole time while he's really just repeating the same thing, this thing that also hasn't been the main topic of discussion so he never would end up in the spotlight. The biggest issue in this whole tunneling spree is that then at the end of day one the vote is between NT and Mouldy, Acid had expressed that he thought that NT and Marvel were scumbuddies yet when it's clear that a marvel lynch isn't going to happen and when NT is on the table he doesn't even attempt to move the vote. No he sits content to leave his vote somewhere where it can't do ANYTHING, washing him of any possible guilt for a mislynch of either candidate.

And looking at his most recent post and one of the only posts of his with any reads that aren't marv/NT (maybe the ONLY post) he goes for literally the easiest reads possible, a couple of lurkers who he gives one line on about them lurking and ONE of WBG/VE because it would be too much work to even decide between that.

Finally as if this all wasn't enough,

after looking through Acid's stuff and concluding much of this, I also looked at ET's filter as promised and found something very interesting. Our resident just-killed townie's largest (Okay maybe second largest) post was an accusation of the one and only Acid. Now this post was a night-time accusation so it didn't draw much attention (if it had I suspect ET would be alive right now) which meant that if say, he had been correct and accused scum they would feel okay shooting him for it as no one really noticed the accusation.

I mean look at why ET was killed,

he seemed town and was playing well as far as I can tell and those very probably contributed to his death

but vets are viewed very highly in these games, so much that it's surprising that both of them are alive even by day two, it's strange that the scum didn't shoot one of the two people who as scumhunters would presumably be their biggest threats,

and one thing that could very much have influenced this choice is if someone else who was playing well also hit on a scum with a good case.

Thus - ##Vote Acid~ QED

On May 24 2012 17:44 wherebugsgo wrote:
Is he gone?

<peeks around a corner>

Anyway if Acid never responds, we kill him.

To make that threat more real, let's turn up the heat.

##vote Acid~

Nova, do you support a lynch of any of Acid, zealos, or Tunkeg?

On May 24 2012 18:49 wherebugsgo wrote:
I already explained why my vote is on Acid.

If the threat isn't real then what's the point of trying to consolidate town? If a player is not willing to even answer a simple question then the easiest way to deal with them is to kill them.

On May 24 2012 18:51 marvellosity wrote:


As opposed to my fake case you mean?

On May 24 2012 18:51 marvellosity wrote:


As opposed to my fake case you mean?

On May 25 2012 01:44 marvellosity wrote:


Instead of talking cryptically, why not just say exactly what you mean?

On May 25 2012 01:53 wherebugsgo wrote:
Marvellosity you just have to read my posts. I'm not giving you nothing and you know that. I'm trying to lynch Zealos just as much as you are, but as long as other players are defending him indirectly by voting other players, but not calling him town, we can't get him killed.

Think about it, everyone calls him suspicious but their votes end up elsewhere.

VE at this point is just being annoying and confrontational. I don't particularly care right now why he keeps calling me scum, since he's obviously wrong, but if today's lynch does not fall on scum then I'll take the responsibility for the lynch.

You can lynch me after and town can lose.

On May 25 2012 02:03 wherebugsgo wrote:


Whether or not Zealos is scum at this point has absolutely nothing to do with zelblade's alignment and therefore I'm obligated to do anything for you in terms of showing you that zelblade is town or whatever.

Either you think Zealos is scum or not. Right now I don't feel like sparing very much effort since there's no point when more than half of you don't read to begin with.

On May 25 2012 03:28 wherebugsgo wrote:


You realize that in order to kill someone in this game, you have to convince them of your correctness?

In other words if you want us to kill zelblade over zealos then you should convince us to kill him instead of telling us to convince you to not kill zelblade.

It's called burden of proof; the burden of proof is always on the person making the assertion. If you make the assertion that zelblade is scum, then YOU should be the one to explain it. No one is obligated to show you why zelblade is innocent or whatever. As town I don't even know if zelblade is innocent.

Anyway, the case on Zealos has already been put forth; read Marvellosity's filter. If you don't want to do that then I don't see how you expect to win, as reading is mandatory to do almost anything else in a game of mafia.

You call the zealos case not strong. What parts of it are weak?

On May 23 2012 00:00 zelblade wrote:

I still think nova is scummy. But mouldy more so. Agree with marv's case generally.

On May 25 2012 04:20 marvellosity wrote:
I have 3 of my scumteam that I'm reasonably confident on. Now for the 4th.

Need Katina, Acid, and zelblade to either start posting or start posting relevantly.

On May 25 2012 04:38 HiroPro wrote:

Hey, if you think the case against Zealos isn't strong, than why. You don't actually mention anything wrong with the case. All you do is keep saying "i'm ok with him. but the case isn't strong" over and over.

On May 25 2012 04:45 Navillus wrote:
Could we get a vote-count up in here?

But what interested me is I think there is definitely a stronger case to be made on Acid than on Zealos or Zelblade, (haven't looked into him yet, give me a little time for that) he made one response, and now no one is voting or pressuring him. So I'd like to ask, Mattchew and Marvel what are your reads on Acid right now?

On May 25 2012 05:13 wherebugsgo wrote:


This is true in almost every single case where you find scum.

Unless scum are bad they don't leave massive trails that just lead back to them. Zealos is not a bad scum player in the least and if it were that easy to find scum we would've killed one yesterday.



You're simply asserting here that it's hard to see the scum agenda. Scum don't like making cases because they already have information about who is town and who is not. Town will at the very least try to scumhunt. Zealos made no real attempt at that on day 1. He admitted himself he thought 13 players were town and one town but less so. That's just a massive cop out from calling anyone scum, a huge shirking of responsibility. It's a sign he doesn't know who to call out for fear of being caught.

Finally, what playstyle? It's not a simple question because the underlying assumptions aren't even properly stated. How can you define a player's playstyle so simply? We don't even know what you're asking.



Going inactive and not scumhunting are about as antitown as you can get.

What I'm curious about is why you seem to assert that zelblade's inactivity is so much more incriminating of him than zealos. You haven't really justified anything you've said, just asserted it.

On May 25 2012 05:40 marvellosity wrote:


I find this entire post deeply inconsistent. I have pointed out several times the scummy motivations for doing what Zealos did. Your justification on zelblade is so weak.

To the bold: so zelblade has some special power, and the best way to utilise it is... wait... it's coming.... I know! to say he's going to post reads and then not! That's sure to make him survive so he can use his powers!

-.-

On May 25 2012 05:36 Navillus wrote:
To clarify I was referring to Zelblade when I said "haven't looked into him yet". I think I saw Marvel's read earlier looking at that... now. Okay I see it, he says he probably shouldn't have included you, that's not a very complete explanation of his thoughts on you, I'm not saying I think he thinks you're town, I'm saying I want to know all of what he thinks on you.

I didn't respond to your response first because as I think I pointed out somewhere it's rarely useful to get into an argument with the person you're accusing on whether they're scum, you're obviously not going to get them to concede anything and frankly I think VE/WBG and Hiro/Zealos had that ground covered, we didn't need another two players going back and forth on each other.

The purpose of this post isn't to make a case on you it's to look at other people and what they say on you, hence the question at the end, I'm curious as to whether the reason your case didn't gain much traction is because you're scum or because better townie's looked and don't think you're scum. (honestly I was leaning to the second one, that's why I asked two people who I think are town, if I thought it was more likely you being scum I would have asked my scum reads because that puts them in an awkward position if you are scum)

I said you were a stronger read than the other two in part because I'm slow to give up my reads (probably a problem with my play) and in part because if I had phrased it a lot less confidently it would have had even less of an impact. I'm explaining this all now because I admit I did like your response and it pushed you away from a scum read for me and after making that post I actually looked over you again (I noticed what Marvel said a little bit after making that post actually) and between your response and posts since I felt less scummy on you.

So if you're town then Acid I have a question for you, is your biggest scumread still Zelblade? Where would you place Zealos right now? Also what do you think of Froggy?

On May 25 2012 06:06 wherebugsgo wrote:


what exactly has zelblade done (other than lurking) that has said that?

Just out of curiosity

On May 23 2012 00:00 zelblade wrote:

I still think nova is scummy. But mouldy more so. Agree with marv's case generally.

On May 25 2012 07:24 marvellosity wrote:
That doesn't really address of what I see as a pretty big inconsistency on his thought process on zelblade/zealos though

On May 25 2012 23:53 Nova_Terra wrote:
Marvel thats the exact scumteam that i was thinking about being possible

On May 26 2012 03:23 GreYMisT wrote:
Vote Count - Roughly 3 Hours and 30 minutes until the deadline
Acid~ (0): Navillus, wherebugsgo
Nova_Terra (0) froggynoddy
Tunkeg (1): wherebugsgo HiroPro, marvellosity
WhereBugsGo (0): Tunkeg, VisceraEyes
HiroPro (4): Zealos, froggynoddy, Mattchew, Tunkeg, VisceraEyes
Zelblade (0): Acid~, wherebugsgo, Mattchew
Katina (0): Nova_Terra, froggynoddy
Zealos (7): HiroPro, Navillus, Mattchew, VisceraEyes, zelblade, marvellosity, wherebugsgo, Nova_Terra, froggynoddy, katina
Not Voted (0):

At the current vote count, Zealos will be lynched.

On May 26 2012 07:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
We should kill Acid as well cause he kept trying to find any excuse possible to get away from the zealos lynch.

On May 26 2012 08:38 wherebugsgo wrote:


you can't just lynch one of us, you have to decide which one of us is scum if you actually believe that.

So which one is it?

Why can't we both be scum? Or town?

Since there should be four scum, you need a read from the rest of the player pool too, right? Who would that be?

On May 26 2012 09:17 VisceraEyes wrote:


Most of the thread does - it's why I can't get a damn wagon rolling XD

On May 25 2012 01:43 wherebugsgo wrote:
Do any of you ever stop to think why Zealos may be impervious to a wagon?

Stop to think of why he may not be getting as many votes as we want him to.

Stop and reread his posts.

On May 26 2012 09:28 VisceraEyes wrote:

What is YOUR interpretation of the Zealos flip Acid? What do you think about Tunkeg's opinion about Mattchew's behavior leading up to the lynch?

On May 26 2012 19:09 Tunkeg wrote:
Zealos, froggynoddy, Mattchew, Tunkeg, VisceraEyes, Acid~

These are the players that voted for HiroPro after the DT check. Zealos, Mattchew, Tunkeg, Acid~ are the players who didn't change their vote. I am certain there is at least one scum among the 5 that isn't Zealos, who either voted and switched or voted and stayed. VE I am scratching, same with froggynoddy (even if I am sold on him being town yet).

This leaves Mattchew and acid.On Mattchew I have said what I think, at least about what occured before the lynch, I have also said what I thought of his flavor posting and his return to normal posting. Acid I think is a good option, he was pushing the counterwagon on Zelblade together with Mattchew. He was softdefending Zealos in a manner that makes me suspicious. He ended up voting Zealos before the claim, but I think the reason for voting is strange:



Add into the mix that Acid left his vote on marvellous day 1, when in the end the lynch was between Jeb and NT, Acids secound biggest scumread. I can not see why a townie wouldn't switch to his secound biggest scumread in a case like this.


Overall I would suggest that the Vig, if the vig is shooting tonight, shoots into the pool that voted HiroPro, and more specifically Mattchew or Acid. These are also the two I think a day 3 lynch should be between if a vig don't shoot.

Also if either of these flips scum Zelblade should be exonerated, as he was the counterwagon,a nd I doubt scum would push another scum for a counterwagon.

On May 26 2012 09:33 Acid~ wrote:


I'm pretty hammered right now, let me sleep it off. I'm quoting this so I remember to respond. I'll do it before the end of the game night.

On May 26 2012 21:42 marvellosity wrote:
I don't like this '50-50 case'.

This isn't the case. Zealos was getting lynched before he outed his claim because a lot of people believed he was scum. Hiro did not have a single vote.

I don't get in which world this is 50-50

On May 26 2012 22:09 Tunkeg wrote:
Also Acid you are contradicting yourself big time if you say you enjoyed the shit out of Mattchews posting:



I'll admit I have a hard time reading these flavor posts as they have some ambiguity to them (hence why I hated them in the first place). But the way I interpret this is that you think Mattchew is being annoying with his flavor posting.

On May 26 2012 23:02 marvellosity wrote:


Yes, and my post there shows how that wasn't the case...

On May 26 2012 21:45 zelblade wrote:
Acid same question: Why didnt you doubt the "DT claim" at all?

Also who is your strongest scumread? Still me?

And tone down on the insults please, no need to start another shitstorm here.

On May 26 2012 22:56 marvellosity wrote:
Tunkeg, I think wbg is town and I think VE is scum.

On May 26 2012 23:07 Tunkeg wrote:


My read is that Acid does not even try to understand half of what he reads. See what I did here Acid? Now reply to:

On May 26 2012 23:31 Tunkeg wrote:


Hmm, so you wanted to show your support for him by replying to a post where he have basicly called you out for sheeping and for being scum (a wolf). He is calling you a sheep in wolfclothes (or at least thats how I read it, and it makes sense in that perspective). No I think you understood what he meant by it, and replied as you did to discredit him, not to show your appreciation.

On May 26 2012 23:39 Tunkeg wrote:


I don't want a pissingcontest either, but I want people to explain it when they are undermining me like that. I can't argue with a statement that says: "You are useless", and thats why it is such a cheap way of going at me. If you give your arguements to why I am useless (still no need to use that expression as it just there to devalue everything I say) people can make up their mind whether you are right or wrong, and I can argue with you if I disagree with your arguements.

Arguing about whether someone is useless or not brings nothing to the table, I agree, so why use the word? But me calling you out for using this wording will, as I won't let people just throw unreasonable accusations out there, which they can't be held accountable for.