Newbie Mafia XL - Page 3

All right, here's the promised case. I hope you Rainbows-supporters take a good look at it because this is a hell of a lot more in-depth than my previous reads.

The Rainbows case:
Exhibit A --
+ Show Spoiler +
Rainbows begins the game by starting some conversation; "don't talk policy", etc. "This is a hypothetical question", etc. At first glance, this seems very pro town. But how much does Rainbows actually contribute to the conversation? Other than "I was guy A", and Exhibit B, the rest of his posts before my first post are either trolly or directed at TRN and have nothing to do with the game. And, he never comes back to address anything about policy later, or people's opinions on policy.

Exhibit B --
+ Show Spoiler +
Alright, a serious vote, or so he claims. Note that Smancer has not posted since Rainbows posted his hypothetical question. Possibly just a pressure vote, maybe looking to draw an OMGUS. Note that this worked very well for the scumteam in NMM XXXIX, because rayn caused TRN to OMGUS and be useless, then Rainbows played the straight man to get TRN to follow him around like a lost sheep. This time, Rainbows is playing the funny man, and I will reference this point again later. Remember also that Rainbows does not answer questions unless he is absolutely bombarded with them and is forced to answer.

Exhibit C --
+ Show Spoiler +
Here we go, his case on me. The vote itself is a little suspect because it's based on a reading of my post that is just flat-out wrong. He takes my policy post, reads it as an attack on him and then you get the above. That can be hand-waved away as perhaps fishing for a reaction, but the second part cannot. He devotes an entire paragraph to point out a contradiction in my post that doesn't exist ("wants policy talk"/"doesn't bring up policy" when I did, in fact, talk policy) and follows it with a one-sentence retraction. He obviously knows he's lying here, so what the hell is going on here? I posit that he was hoping nobody would notice the contradiction in his own case while leaving himself an out in case the wagon on me didn't get rolling.

Exhibit D --
+ Show Spoiler +
Next up, from the same post, his case on nobodywonder. If he hadn't included the reference to me it might have come across fine. "This guy is scummy, but not as scummy as I think Saraf is." He doesn't say that though. He does specifically what he accuses me of doing: he says I might be town, but leaves his vote on me anyway. He then says NW is scummy and wants more opinions on him. He knows the wagon on me might not stick so he's getting ready to start another one.

Exhibit E --
+ Show Spoiler +
His case on TheRavensName. Three tries and none of the wagons stuck, and he didn't get OMGUS'd. This one was guaranteed. He saw how TRN played in XXXIX, he knows TRN is going to OMGUS and make himself look bad. The case itself isn't bad because he's right about TRN's contributions to that point: basically calling nobodywonder bad (and somehow therefore a townie?), and calling out Rainbows's case on me.

Exhibit F --
+ Show Spoiler +
Another case, this time on JarJarDrinks. Now, JJD had the same number of posts as I do (excluding my "going to bed" post and the "brb, writing cases" post, he was (and still is) lurking something hardcore. This is an easy case to make, and a very good way to divert suspicion. With these last two cases he's saying "Why lynch me? I'm trying to hunt scum and help town! We should lynch TRN who's useless or JJD who's lurking!" Here's the part where Rainbows, if he was REALLY the Vigilante could have spent his bullet in the morning.

In conclusion, while Rainbows gets conversations started, he never comes back to them to actually contribute. His cases are based on either misinformation (Exhibit C & D) or on easy targets (Raven = OMGUS & JJD = lurking). He is throwing wagons against the wall to see if they will stick, he is deliberately trying to get rises out of people by machine-gun voting and once called out instead of defending himself, he explodes. "I'm obviously town", he says, "you all must just be stupid". He is playing the "funny man" in a two-man (in this particular instance 3-man) shtick and the other two mafia look way reasonable by comparison. It worked for scum in NMM XXXIX and they're trying to get away with it again here.

Rainbows is really scummy.

At the start, he had the opportunity to continue discussing what was being discussed, but instead he brings up this hypotetical question. Now what purpose does it serve? Scum could post this to know what kind of behaviour we find scummy. Town could post this to generate discussion. But I don't believe that. Rainbows had already got good discussion rolling about something that matters to town (policy). But instead he brings up something that can't benefit town. And there is no followup whatsoever.

Rainbows asked if Ravens was scum or VT. Blatant bluefishing. No scum would ever answear "Yes, I'm scum". If Ravens had claimed VT there, scum would know he isn't blue. Ravens may have in confusion softclaimed a powerrole there. I can't find any townie reasonin Rainbows would ask this question.

Rainbows says how he likes Obzy. If you look at any mafia games posts, when someone likes someone, he thinks that guy is town. Just look at the list posts in this game: "I don't like XXX" is used in contexes, where people think XXX is scummy. Yet when I ask him to explain his liking of Obzy, he says he liked the name and that he has posted a lot, when at the time, Obzy had three posts. If look at those three posts, that is not a good basis for a town read.

Rainbows thinks he is the center of the thread and that he should be talked about.
On April 06 2013 01:49 Rainbows wrote:
Show nested quote +


You were summing up the thread because I was the only one doing things.
On April 06 2013 12:36 Rainbows wrote:
Show nested quote +


First post of the day. Neglects to comment on my play which I find exceedingly odd. I was pretty much the entire thread at that point.
On April 05 2013 23:37 Rainbows wrote:
Show nested quote +


A bunch of generic pro-town things being advocated. He provides a (bad) summary of events in the thread and... that's it.

[snip]

Show nested quote +


It is obvious that Saraf is referring to me here. I'm spamming, I'm doing a bunch of nuisance-like things and he doesn't like it. He says he would like to lynch me; even if I'm probably town. Saraf seems to know I'm town, because he refers to me as such and tells me how I should be playing.

[snip]

I digress, he's brought up the policy to 'lynch the spammiest asshole', but that in itself people are already talking about because I'm the center of discussion. So antagonisitic.
On April 06 2013 12:12 Rainbows wrote:
He didn't do anything of use early game. He was around, but chose to do nothing useful. He barely even talked to me, and pretty much ignored events in the thread. His real 'entrance' post to the thread is here:
This scummy since Rainbows clearly cares his image. He cares that people see him as town. He cares enough to make a point of being the center of discussion. Scum care for their image.

Here is another case of Rainbows caring about his image:
On April 05 2013 23:37 Rainbows wrote
Nobodywonder

Show nested quote +


NW gives a huge summary. and throws some shit. He meditates on the policy thing, which I told everyone wasn't policy. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOW PEOPLE THINK AND POLICY JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE. Had to get out of the way. This post, and subsequently the spoiler, show no effort on NW's part to come to a conrete read on me. He simply says that I'm doing things. He seems really apprehensive about giving an actual read and just flops around.

I want peoples opinions of NW. Saraf might just be a banality-spewing town; and I'm unsure if his lolpolicy was serious or not. But NW - that guy. He's scummy.
The only post which he brings up from nobodywonder is this one, where nobodywonder suspects Rainbows.


Rainbows is hellbent in his interpretating that Saraf called him town, even when multiple people have said that was not what Saraf intented to say. If Saraf is town, what Rainbow did was scummy, because he has more reasons to potentiaaly misslynch Saraf. If Saraf is scum, it's still scummy. Rainbows appears to put pressure on Saraf and if Saraf is ever on the chopping block, Rainbows can go "oh shit, my reasoning is really dump" and save him.

Rainbows, what happened to your vendetta on saraf? Did you just forget? Honestly what you're doing is stupid whether you're town or mafia. Few people trust you - that's a good reason NOT to lead a charge. Maybe you should've asked the coaches to look over your long tyrade before you posted it.

I want to make a case against JarJarDrinks.

Jarjar has been playing very lurky. There are only two players he has talked about: Me and Rainbows. His first post was a vote against me.

On April 05 2013 21:45 JarJarDrinks wrote:
K, just caught up.

I think jrkirby is my scummiest read at the moment. He votes rainbows pretty early. Then later on he tells us that he feels like he "might actually be a fatty, and is just acting stupid" BUT he feels like he has to vote for him because he's "helping the skinnies".

Anyone that votes for someone and then defends them is gonna read scum to me.

##vote: jrkirby



Barely any reasoning at all. None of his other posts expand on this reasoning. He says that he likes that rainbows is talking a lot, yet he himself barely says a thing.

On April 06 2013 04:06 JarJarDrinks wrote:
Show nested quote +
Reading rainbows as town mostly but that's due in part to believing that you're scum. He's talking alot which I like. Though he did that in the last game which had me fooled for quite a bit.

My turn for a question: Why did you unvote?


When I call him out on it he just says this:

On April 06 2013 04:41 JarJarDrinks wrote:
Show nested quote +
I'm here now. Right now you're my top scumread so I'm focusing on you. Like every post you make looks more and more scummy to me. So now you were voting for him but it wasn't a serious vote?


And then dissapears. For a whole day.

RECAP: Votes for little reason, gives reads on almost no one, lurks, claims he likes people who post a lot, and never posts.

Why not Rainbows:
+ Show Spoiler +

Why not TheRavensName:
+ Show Spoiler +

Why not jampidampi:
+ Show Spoiler +

Day one lynch:
TheRavensname (1) Rainbows
Rainbows (2) Warent, TheRavensName
jrkirby (2) JarJarDrinks, nobodywonder
jampidampi (4) Smancer, Obzy, Fishgle, Moloch
JarJarDrinks (3) Saraf, jrkirby, jampidampi

Day two lynch:
TheRavensname (2) Rainbows, Moloch
Rainbows (2) TheRavensName, Warent
jrkirby (5) JarJarDrinks, nobodywonder, Fishgle, Obzy, Smancer
JarJarDrinks (1) jrkirby

Right now I think scum is trying to get us to misslynch each others I've got town reads on both Kirby and Moloch. I've liked Molochs reasoning from day one and there isn't really any case against him.

I know many of you have town reads on Rain now - but I do want to take a closer look at his claim and see what could have motivated it from a scum or town perspective.

Please read and consider this.
Motives for the claim from a scum perspective:
Rainbow was set to be Lynched at the time, had he not claimed - he would probably go. If he is scum; fake claiming at that point is one of his best moves. These are the different outcomes:

a) Claiming fails, he get lynched: No difference.
b) There is a real vigi in the game who counter claims - it words against words - rain get lynched and mafia knows who the real Vigilant are.
c) There is a real vigi in the game who counter claims: The counter claimer gets lynched - the real vigil is gone
d) The lynched is stopped, someone else (town) gets lynched and the real vigi shots rainbow. Shot now used on someone who would have been lynched had he not faked claimed. Town loses one, scum loses one, and one power role loses its power.
e) The lynched is stopped, there is no vigi in the game. Rain comes out looking like the good guy.

So why not claim for example medic? On the surface claiming vigi seems to be one of the stupidest fake claims "because he will just get shot" and is thus more likely to be believed. But when looked at more closely it is motivated.

Very good motives to fake claim vigi if you are set to be lynched. None of a-e would be worse for scum than a straight up scum lynch.