Newbie Mini Mafia XXI

On July 19 2012 09:02 YourHarry wrote:


Vanilla townies also get roleblocked. So do scums

On July 20 2012 09:20 JingleHell wrote:
He already answered you, Harry. And Mufaa. It's worse than that, he's tried to get people to roleclaim TWICE now.

On July 19 2012 16:09 YourHarry wrote:


First, I retracted my assertion that Fulla is definitely town. This is NOT because my logic was bad, but that I realized that the premise in which I drew the conclusion from was incorrect. After Obvious.660 flipped town, I wanted to see what kind of conclusions I could draw from it. I quickly skimmed the pages prior to the mislynch and noticed Fulla voting for Obvious.660 even though his vote did not matter. This struck me as an obvious townie action, because while scums want to execute mislynches, no scum would unnecessarily contribute to lynch a player they know will flip town. This logic still stands.

Above argument is even stronger in Fulla's case because Fulla did not have previous suspicion of Obvious.660. He suddenly appeared, and without much reason, unnecessarily added his name under the list of players contributing to Obvious.660's bandwagon. Scum Fulla would not have done this, knowing that simply staying away or voting for another player would still end up in Obvious.660's death.

Of course, it turns out that Fulla did not know the rules of plurality lynch and that he actually thought that his vote would make a difference. So, my argument no longer stands because my argument relied on Fulla knowing that mislynch would occur regardless of his vote.

As an aside, I still think Fulla is very likely to be town. I outlined why this is the case in earlier post, but this has nothing to do with my defense.



True. Is this a scum tell? Are you going to argue that scums, since they know everyone else is town, would have hard time coming up with arguments for their "fake" suspicion? If so, I would agree with it. But it would not be difficult to manufacture fake suspicions. And I personally know that making lengthy posts analyzing players' scumminess would seem very protown. Scum Harry would have spent the effort to engineer some of these "dedicated suspicion".

Sometimes, I may have somewhat strong scum reads by Day 1. In this game, I had fleeting suspicions on various players which is clearly outlined by my (albeit short) posts and voting patterns. Again, you can argue that this is suspicious, but scum Harry, wanting to fit in with town, would have controlled his voting. Be strong and dedicated in your read, scum Harry would have reminded himself. Always back your voting and explain yourself, too, scum Harry, so people would read you as town.

Incidentally, I do not blame people for finding me suspicious for being all over the place, often with little reason. I often get in this kind of trouble in my other games. And I agree that I should explain myself more, although this is sometimes hard because my suspicions are often based on things that are seemingly trivial stuff. So, while it would be better for the town if I explained myself better and kept myself away from other players' suspicion, if there is one thing I am NOT going to do as a town, it is to build a fake case or engineer plausible reasons that I don't necessarily believe to be true just to convince others to lynch a player I think is scum.



It is a possibility. So? This is not evidence.

Pick any combinations of players, and you can come up with a fiction of X, Y, and Z scum team based on bussing and buddying.



[sarcasm]Yes, I knew he was the veteran!! [/sarcasm] BTW. Based on the your questions regarding the mechanics of game (before this game started), I think you are intelligent enough to avoid this kind of fallacy if you are genuinely scumhunting.

Regardless, I still maintain that I do not understand why people think/thought that they found Obvious.660's list scummy. (But then, why did I vote for Obvious.660? I already explained this. I initially dismissed Obvious.660's sudden accusation of tube for changing his writing style, but I changed my mind after reading Jingle's post). But just because I think Obvious.660 is scummy, does not mean that I would find all of his posts scummy.



Well, I was wrong about Obvious.660. So, I can't say that your reads have been good. But if I really wanted to spread suspicion, whether town or scum, I would do it in a much more constructive way instead of posting one liners.



I almost forgot about explaining why I said that. My reason for saying that was based on the fact that scum Harry would not have a strong reason for preferring Obvious.660 mislynch over tube mislynch. And at the time, the two primary suspects projected to be lynched were tube and Obvious.660. And if tube is town, it would be hard to explain why scum Harry would suddenly change his vote to jump on a different bandwagon. Either mislynch would have suited scum Harry just fine.



You? Well, technically, I am not trying to spread blame. That doesn't sound good. How about, I am trying to find scums!



Did I say I was being anti-town? If I did, I would be guilty for not inciting more discussions by providing stronger reads. But I did not have any strong reads - which was reflected in my quick changes in my voting. Don't blame me for not trying, though.



I will repeat: I did lack conviction. I did backtrack. I am guilty of these things. But I explained why these are not necessarily scummy. And while we disagreed on many things (? what did we disagree on?), I don't see how that makes me scum. Scum may even try to agree with others. And as for pressuring people to talk, I did some of that too. But even if I didn't, I wouldn't consider it as a strong evidence.



Well, my excuse is that I intended to pressure people. But more importantly, shh... + Show Spoiler +



Wait, is this a scum tell LOL. Do you actually know that I am town and blaming my poor play for what is obviously going to turn out to be a mislynch?



WOW So many reasons why I am scum. I must have made many mistakes playing scum

Many of the points he made above are redundant. If you were genuinely scum hunting, you could have simply stated something like "Harry is suspicious because he lacks conviction and has changed his votes many times without reasons," instead of carefully packaging redundant "evidence" into different dressings.

I accuse calgar of trying to scam town into thinking your case is actually more substantial than it is.

In addition, I accuse calgar of trying to rolehunt and making a fallacy that only scums would make (assuming decent intelligence) to artificially make me look scummier. Another evidence for similar scummy behavior can be seen HERE. He did add an EDBWOP post immediately after that, but I am not sure what he was referring to. Waiting for him to clarify.

He also seems to be planning ahead to guide the towns to agree on the "list of people to be lynched" to choose from. But this could just be my imagination.

On July 19 2012 23:23 JingleHell wrote:
That reads painfully like an OMGUS, Fulla.

I have something relatively damning waiting to come to light, the only reason I've held off on it was to wait for it to become less circumstantial, which it has. Since Calgar commented on it, I'll present it. Although since I agreed to it, he suddenly seems wary of bringing my breadcrumb he commented on to light.




Rather visible, yes? "Jailer Calgar." That's right, Calgar was jailed. Now, you might wonder what good that could do? Well, something I've been paranoid about was the possibility of a Hapa scum. It would take fairly damning evidence for me to accuse him without it looking like an extension of our dislike for each other, even though we've kept votes off each other throughout.

Well, if we assume townie, with Calgar blocked and protected, the most obvious target for an NK would be Hapa. Especially since there's usually not that many blue roles in newbie games, with Vet flipped, and me obviously on Calgar, Hapa should have been fair game. Instead, they went for Evul. Two possible values for this. One, it could look like I was breadcrumbing an NK, putting suspicion on me, but since scum can talk in QT, that would just be arrogant and foolish. Also, if Hapahauli was scum, they obviously wouldn't NK him, so they just killed a random dude.

Since I posted heavy suspicions on Calgar for his post about vigi hit on Perfection after that, Hapa has stepped in to defend him, posting copious amounts of WIFOM.

On July 19 2012 09:02 YourHarry wrote:


Vanilla townies also get roleblocked. So do scums

On July 19 2012 09:05 calgar wrote:
EBWOP I see your point, I retract #12.

On July 20 2012 09:07 calgar wrote:
I didn't receive a notification.

Under what conditions is someone notified if they are RBed/Jailed?

On June 30 2012 05:27 Radfield wrote:

Things to keep in mind:

*The Godfather is immune to tracking.

*The godfather will return as Innocent, and a miller with return as Guilty to detective checks.

*The Miller will show up to tracking as visiting a random player.

*Mafia players will be tracked to the target of their roles, not to the kill target. In the event a mafia player does NOT use his role, he will be tracked to the kill target.

*Players will be notified if they are roleblocked, whether they have a role or not.