Newbie Mafia XL

On April 05 2013 09:16 Smancer wrote:
##Vote: Rainbows

Obviously trying to get town to waste votes on a lurker that will most likely be mod killed at the end of the day.

On April 05 2013 09:33 Moloch wrote:


I'm fine with you telling everyone why you're doing everything. If you try to implement a policy that you want everyone in the game to follow it exactly, you'll probably get people complaining since not everyone wants the same thing.

On April 05 2013 10:13 jrkirby wrote:
##Vote Rainbows

I think he's just trying to jerk us around here and distract us. If he's fat, he doesn't have much info yet and wouldn't make so many wild accusations so quickly.

On April 05 2013 11:39 TheRavensName wrote:


Not happy actually. I feel pretty sick, today is the first day I've been able to stay up for more then two hours after my classes.

On April 05 2013 11:57 Saraf wrote:
glhf
Can we vote for a no-lynch in this game, or must votes be placed on individuals?



Not talking policy Day 1 is bullshit. Scum know who scum are but we don't, and the only way we catch scum is by making them fuck up. Even if the policy ends up being "there is no policy", the debate drives conversation and conversation is the only reliable way we have of rooting out scum and eliminating them. Problems arise for town when scum derails the conversation, so here's some day 1 policy to chew on:

In the absence of really strong reads, lynch the spammiest asshole who shits up the thread the most. Spamming the thread is a scum tactic to distract and disrupt town; even if the spammiest asshole is just some poor well-meaning fattie (who should have applied the litmus test "does this post help town?"), at the very least in Day 2 the thread will be less shit up, and it'll be easier to find scum without him shitting up the thread.

On April 05 2013 12:10 TheRavensName wrote:

I'm a serial killer.

On April 05 2013 15:53 Warent wrote:
Good morning,

First off all, my prime playing time will probably be when you US folks are sleeping and the other way around. So please keep in mind that it may sometimes take several hours before I can answer question and provide my view points.

We should try to find a middle ground between spam and lurking, obviously neither are good for town. But I rather we focus on posting when we have some new insight to provide, and thus help keep the thread atleast somewhat clean. Unessecary spam is just... spam. I fail to see how spam, confusion and weak claims are helping town.

This is what've noticed after reading this thread (and I'm not alone): In less than 8 hours, Rainbows has provided three different "cases".
The first one could be passed off as a joke.
The second, according to himself a "serious" vote based on not getting an answer quickly enough (?).
The third, and this time he really want to get a lynch going, based on nothing (or wierd reading skills).

I would like to hear Rainbows explanation.

On April 05 2013 16:03 Warent wrote:
My read is bad townie or scum.

On April 05 2013 11:57 Saraf wrote:
glhf
Can we vote for a no-lynch in this game, or must votes be placed on individuals?



Not talking policy Day 1 is bullshit. Scum know who scum are but we don't, and the only way we catch scum is by making them fuck up. Even if the policy ends up being "there is no policy", the debate drives conversation and conversation is the only reliable way we have of rooting out scum and eliminating them. Problems arise for town when scum derails the conversation, so here's some day 1 policy to chew on:

In the absence of really strong reads, lynch the spammiest asshole who shits up the thread the most. Spamming the thread is a scum tactic to distract and disrupt town; even if the spammiest asshole is just some poor well-meaning fattie (who should have applied the litmus test "does this post help town?"), at the very least in Day 2 the thread will be less shit up, and it'll be easier to find scum without him shitting up the thread.

On April 05 2013 13:35 Saraf wrote:
Obzy: posting a lot is not the same as spam. If you post a ton, and all of your posts contribute to scumhunting/creating a pro-town environment then are you spamming? Obviously not. Look at everything posted from the start of the game up until Rainbows drops the "comment on this" post about policy. Everything prior is pointless and spam. Look at the rando dialogue between Rainbows and TRN, what point does that serve? Before anyone got the ball rolling that was fine, but if, for instance, I just look at Rainbows's vote on me and OMGUS him now what do I accomplish? Jack shit, I spam the thread, and just make myself look an ass. And I do want people to chew on the policy, see if they think it sucks, see if they think it's good. And see why they think the way they do.

Rainbows, you're obviously up, what do you actually think about the policy?

On April 05 2013 16:03 nobodywonder wrote:
Well I can't say scum for sure, but I definitely don't like it.

Rainbow votes Smancer. Then Rainbow unvotes, then talks about his policy that there should be no policy and that everyone has their own policy. Rainbow then brings up a policy scenario. Well, he states it isn't policy based. Well to me, it sounds like it is, since a policy defines a set of actions in response to certain behavior. I don't know that Rainbow would bring a policy question and call it not policy, seems like he's cautiously gauging townie response and the town meta.

Honestly, I want a response from not only Rainbow but also Smancer, since to me, it's interesting that Rainbow voted Smancer, unvoted Smancer and then voted Smancer again. In response Smancer had voted Rainbows and then unvoted Rainbow. I just a lil' weirded out by the voting trend.

+ Show Spoiler +

On April 05 2013 23:32 Smancer wrote:
Coming back an hour later I think my conspiracy theory about posts being close together was a bit over the top. I am leaving my vote for now because I don't like how jrkirby pointed at the one person who was trying to get the ball rolling in finding scum.

Is anyone here?

On April 06 2013 01:24 Warent wrote:


I was not providing a summary of events in the thread - I was summing up your actions. Perhaps it wasn't clear enough, no worries, hopefully this will make things more clear.

##Vote Rainbow

As far as policies goes, this is my opinion: we should not lynch people based on whims, misinterpretations or lies.
Rainbows third, so called, case against Saraf is completely based on either an obvious misinterpretation or a lie.

Saraf:


Rainbow:


Rainbow:


Saraf has never called Rainbow town. Even if does NOT equal probably town! Rainbow must know this.

I don't think this is a misinterpretation, I think this is Rainbow trying to create something out of nothing. Most likely reason the obvious one - he is scum. And he's not helping himself when he refuses to explain his own action but rather continue to accuse others.

On April 06 2013 02:21 jrkirby wrote:
I wish it were easier to tell the difference between stupid townie and scum T.T

On April 05 2013 19:29 TheRavensName wrote:
God I must be feeling poorly when my first thought of waking up at 5:30 AM is to read the entire thread and try to figure it all out half awake. But, lets see where it goes.

Rainbows I have a question for you because I know you hate talking about policy.... why did you bring up a situation in vague enough terms that it had to be answered with policy and not answer it yourself? Its rather unlike your past games (I also know you hate Meta analysis.).. PS:Saraf called you an idiot and an asshole, who just MIGHT be a townie too but think its unlikely. Not really the best lynch reason.

Jampi: Why are you calling Rainbows out for policy lynching? He seems to have made it pretty clear he hates policy discussion in general, and he has yet to really use it in any of his previous games.

Jrk: Postig at random people is actually how rainbows plays. Look at the previous two newbie mini games for proof of that. Do you have another scum read? Or is the phrase other guy just referring to the lurkers?

Obzy: DO not go down the road of assuming everyone is town because no one is objecting to them being town. We made that mistake with rainbows last game and it cost us so badly. ALWAYS assume everyone is scum until they give you a really really good reason, which you should only share if your confident enough in your read to help defend them, and even then.. you need to hold them to the same degree of suspicion as your scum reads. You need to compare them to the results and look at who they are going after and make sure your not getting fooled.

Alot of people are calling Rainbows out for spammyness, but it seems quite a few other people are spamming pretty hard themselves, see the discussion on lurkers killing all of the drones and bio before people have even had 24 hours to get into the thread (I think jarjar still the only person who hasn't posted sense he /ined, so I would say theres only one real lurker.) and mentions of Rainbow's role claim last game by Obzy for examples. Just going to toss this out there: Come up with more then just spammyness by the end of day 1, sense he did get the discussion ball rolling at least.

Now back to sleep before I have to go to class.

On April 06 2013 03:06 TheRavensName wrote:

Seeing as how this is the third game now where NW has been a scummy read day one... have we ever wondered if NW just isn't that bright/isn't that good? I think NW just isn't that great and just makes mistakes and poor judgements that never seem to go well for him.
Just curious rainbows: Do you think Saraf or Nobodywonder has a higher chance of being scum, seeing as how right now the way I read it based off that wording is that you yourself are now voting for a guy you think might be town compared to a guy you think is scummy.

On April 06 2013 11:46 TheRavensName wrote:

To answer the first part: Rainbows brought it up I went off what he said.

Onto the next question: I think, at this moment, Nobodywonder is a sort of dumb town. What he says tseems to lack thought at times, and hes been scummy person on the first two days two games in a row acting exactly the same way as he has done so now, and he was VT both those times. So unless he makes a move that pushes me otherwise, I'm going to read dumb town on him.

Third part: I do think Rain's vote on Saraf is suspect. I'm stating that in that last part of rainbow's post that was a response to, which I think was poorly worded and was asking for clarification, that it looked like he had made the decision Saraf was at least maybe town and that Nobodywonder was just flat out scummy. If thats how he feels, why is he voting for Saraf still? Thats his whole reason for going after Safaf anyways (In that rainbows disliked that Sarif is voting for someone he said may have been scummy.)

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

On April 06 2013 04:06 JarJarDrinks wrote:
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?

On April 06 2013 04:41 JarJarDrinks wrote:
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?

On April 06 2013 12:36 Moloch wrote:


I think he is correct in calling it a vendetta. You don't just say what you think and vote accordingly, you go over-the-top aggressive and then you shout at everyone to do exactly what you do. Then you switch targets at the drop of a pin.

This is the very first day, there is no way anyone can be as certain about anyone as you claim to be about your reads.

I'm keeping my vote on you for now because I'm not extremely suspicious about anyone else (just mildly suspicious about everyone), and you seem to feel the need to cause as much discord as you can.

On April 06 2013 12:52 Fishgle wrote:
I'm unsure about your reasoning rainbow. I think jarjar is just a lazy player. Your arguments against TRN make more sense, i think. I want to see his response. But what about kirby, warent, and jampidampi? You've hardly talked about them.

also, i'm heading out for a party soon, probably wont post again til... 14 hours from now? I might post between party and bed, but i doubt it.

On April 06 2013 13:05 Moloch wrote:


You use caps lock regularly and a large amount of sarcasm, which give your posts an overall feel of aggressiveness. Maybe that's just me. You said that everyone who doesn't trust you is either scum or an idiot. I have to admit I overstated you yelling at everyone to do what you do; you just yell (how I interpret the caps locks) at people and then say that people who don't do what you do are idiots.

I don't believe anything I've said has conflicted with something else I've said.

Yes, you've been reading a lot of people, yes, but the people you suspect (first Saraf, then TRN) you present in a 100% matter-of-fact way, which is what I was referring to.

On April 06 2013 13:06 Moloch wrote:


Be a bit more patient next time. I had to answer the door and get my pizza.

On April 06 2013 13:22 Moloch wrote:


Hahaha. Want a picture?

On April 06 2013 14:11 TheRavensName wrote:

Since when? If you want to discard my reasons for being here, thats fine. I feel like shit, I do have school things I had to do today, and they are done now. But you do not lie to me. Most of my post in the early game either were talking to you, or were about you, theres not many so its not that hard, but do not lie about that. Theres plenty of people trying to get you to answer questions, and I've posted a few for you myself you've neglected to answer.

Onto your next section of the case: How did I call Nobodywonder a newbie town and not give a read on him at all? Town has plenty of reason to defend people who they think could be stupid townies, because in a newbie game not only are they usually, they also are pretty easy to band wagon when they are so scummie seeming. I'm trying to keep a mislynch from happening like a good townie, and I gave out a read, sue me.

Third part: You read that, its a clarification response to a request from a post I made. You could have taken this time to address why you think NW is scummy but not vote worthy, like I expressed interest in knowing,and your not which is suspicious. Its a read, which makes it twice your accusing me of not making a read in the same post where I did. And if your going to bring meta into it you know that I am terrible at making cases up on my own, and I do the best by adding onto other peoples.

I'm going to make this last point, I don't like that your spreading half truths and coming after me for alot of the same shit some people are going after you for without explaining much of anything about any of the problems people have with you. Heres a vote for you:
##Vote: Rainbows

I'm going back to sleep now.

On April 06 2013 14:11 TheRavensName wrote:

1.) Since when? If you want to discard my reasons for being here, thats fine. I feel like shit, I do have school things I had to do today, and they are done now. But you do not lie to me. Most of my post in the early game either were talking to you, or were about you, theres not many so its not that hard, but do not lie about that. Theres plenty of people trying to get you to answer questions, and I've posted a few for you myself you've neglected to answer.

2.) Onto your next section of the case: How did I call Nobodywonder a newbie town and not give a read on him at all? Town has plenty of reason to defend people who they think could be stupid townies, because in a newbie game not only are they usually, they also are pretty easy to band wagon when they are so scummie seeming. I'm trying to keep a mislynch from happening like a good townie, and I gave out a read, sue me.

3.) Third part: You read that, its a clarification response to a request from a post I made. You could have taken this time to address why you think NW is scummy but not vote worthy, like I expressed interest in knowing,and your not which is suspicious. Its a read, which makes it twice your accusing me of not making a read in the same post where I did. And if your going to bring meta into it you know that I am terrible at making cases up on my own, and I do the best by adding onto other peoples.

I'm going to make this last point, I don't like that your spreading half truths and coming after me for alot of the same shit some people are going after you for without explaining much of anything about any of the problems people have with you. Heres a vote for you:
##Vote: Rainbows

I'm going back to sleep now.

On April 06 2013 14:19 TheRavensName wrote:

My first vote is almost always an OMGUS, because I'm almost always called scum day 1.

On April 05 2013 10:46 TheRavensName wrote:
How is this question answered without bringing policy or meta into this, which you said you wanted to avoid?

On April 06 2013 15:03 jampidampi wrote:
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.

On April 06 2013 15:54 Moloch wrote:
Yeah, but now that you're frustrated, you're claming you're not scum because of your own policy!



You say this isn't policy in the post, but that's exactly what you're asking everyone to tell you.

I was really starting to warm up to you until this temper tantrum.

On April 08 2013 10:15 jrkirby wrote:
Ah, I see what you're saying. RAINBOWS GET BACK IN HERE AND TELL US IF YOU WERE ROLEBLOCKED!

On April 09 2013 00:37 TheRavensName wrote:

Rainbows case against me is based just as much on meta... he's saying I'm usuakky aggressive day 1, which is actually a meta lie because look at the first game we played together, I was called out for being excited to start and then not posting for a little bit.

On April 09 2013 03:27 Warent wrote:


Why are you still alive?

On April 09 2013 03:35 Warent wrote:


Why is he a Lynch candidate?

On April 09 2013 05:18 TheRavensName wrote:

I could ask you the same question, if I'm scum who are mine? My answer to yours is I simply don't know. Right now I'm trying to figure out if Obzy was defending you out of being scum or not, one of the few people that stands out to me is Warant, because he is one of the only people that called you scum and you basically ignored in comarpsion to everyone else: He didn't get a nice pretty rainbows vote next to his name.

On April 09 2013 05:25 TheRavensName wrote:

Yes, but everyone who even made somewhat of a case against you got a vote against him.

On April 09 2013 06:15 TheRavensName wrote:

No, but you had Ray play the suicide last game, just like that previous game you played Omni in order to get me to side with you. I don't see why you wouldn't try the same trick again.

On April 09 2013 06:22 TheRavensName wrote:

Sorry, I meant previous game as in the game with Ray. And um.... Ray never got a single vote on him that wasn't Me or you.... So yes. Ray was a town read I'm assuming?

On April 10 2013 01:26 TheRavensName wrote:

Thats okay. I'm still convinced your scum too.

On April 09 2013 22:10 TheRavensName wrote:

This is one of the first things that stood out to me in Moloch's filter, even if the entire scenario rainbows ended up creatined was little silly I feel it should be asked: By this logic, why did you not at least even vote for Jarjar once? JJD STILL has a one page filter, and Jampi had a 3 page filter day 1. Even Rainbows had a 4 page filter when he made his last post of voting for me, and hes the only other person you voted for.
+ Show Spoiler +

You also completly avoided analysing the Lynch here you were part of causing, good job on that. Nor is there any analysis on the Night kill. So good job on that. Another useless post from moloch+ Show Spoiler + So did you ever plan on actually doing any analysis this game? Or are you just going to just sit around and be your own suspicion type?

##Unvote
##Vote: Moloch

On April 09 2013 05:31 TheRavensName wrote:

And you voted for everyone but me that made a semi decent case against you. EXCEPT Warant. Hell and lets look at all of those cases, every single one of them was based off a misinterpreation or a flat out lie/omission of anything that countermands the case even a little bit.

On April 10 2013 02:02 TheRavensName wrote:
Rainbows, I've posted my logic and evidence so many times. You don't even pay attention to it. Why the fuck should I waste the time to consolidate it all over again? I'll just get called out for focusing on you. I'm not falling for it.

On April 10 2013 08:33 TheRavensName wrote:

So that the scum would know all three blue roles? Are you sure your town because that is some pretty blatant blue fishing.

On April 10 2013 08:40 TheRavensName wrote:

You didn't vote for the two people you said you actually had scum reads on...

On April 11 2013 05:59 Smancer wrote:
Wait, how are you going to shoot Raven




You used your shot didn't you? Maybe I am confused:

If Vig is rollblocked and tries to shoot someone, does he still have a shot to use later?

On April 11 2013 05:59 Warent wrote:
How convenient that you will survive and Rainbow as well

@Smancer, I agree, but the night events must be considered as well.

Good night.

On April 11 2013 05:59 Warent wrote:
How convenient that you will survive and Rainbow as well.

@Smancer, I agree, but the night events must be considered as well.

Good night.

On April 11 2013 06:14 Obzy wrote:
Hm, I jumped around a little, allow me to clarify - again - I'm posting a little hastily today hehe.

My claim was stupid, I should have held onto it for longer for obvious reasons.
I think he is claiming scum because attacking me is fucking idiotic from a town perspective, and his logic sucks, and he's also lying.

On April 11 2013 07:27 Fishgle wrote:
Alright, warent's implication that obzy and rainbows have a giant fake-claiming conspiracy is a bit too much. Hell, i'm extremely paranoid, but not that much. Two fake claims? If neither of them are telling the truth, then where are our real blues? Are any of you reading this blue? If obzy doesn't get killed tonight, and someone else reveals blue tomorrow, then i'll be willing to vote either rainbows or obzy. But right now, nope. Sorry, warrent. Doesn't make sense. You're trying to push a false conspiracy too far.

obzy, yesterday i was going to tell you that night is a bad time to claim doctor (i had a long post written out explaining why it was bad xD), but i didn't want to sound like an ass. I agree, i don't think there's any way that they're going to let you live now.

I think warent is trying to mislead us all by telling us to vote for one of the 4 guys who did the mislynch day 1. I think that day1 all of us that voted for a mislynch (me, obsy, moloch, smancer) are town. We just voted badly, mafia didn't even need to associate itself with the kill, and is now trying to push a lynch on us.

So with this in mind, and looking at the votes: The saraf kill makes more logical sense. Scum was trying to set us up for a jarjar kill day 2. [jarjar's votes were (3) Saraf jrkirby, jampidampi] But then jarjar finally stopped lurking and made a giant post against jrkirby. Look how quickly nobodywonder jumped out of the woodwork to join in on that lynch. Mafia thought that we would still be going after jarjar if jrkirby got mislynched (which we aren't, too much, even though we should be) and allowed jrkirby to die. So... possibly Warent + nobodywonder + rainbows/raven scumteam? It sounds kind of sketchy but with how well we have been killing ourselves off this game it might be possible that mafia has been mostly uninvolved directly with the kills.

Does that make any sense?

On April 12 2013 00:47 Smancer wrote:
This day is already wasting, there is virtually no activity but lots of things to discuss.

@Rainbows, you said earlier that having 3 blue rolls in this format is "stupid op". Well, we now have two confirmed dead blues, and your claim as vig.

In regards to the nolynch, here are my thoughts:

I've been struggling with how exactly are we going to deduce information from the impending NK ? You said it will give us great information. I am sitting here trying to go through each person left, and trying to determine what it would directly imply if each person, including myself was their target in the night. IN most cases I get into a big heap of circular logic.

Furthermore Mafia knows the reason for a nolynch vote is to try and get information. So why would they NK someone who would give us information. If we vote nolynch today, wouldn't they NK the person that they think would give us the least Info, or the person that would throw us the most of the right path?

Fact of the matter is, all mafia has to do is pick one of us remaining townies at random, and sit back and watch the shit storm that would follow, while we focus entirely on the NK and not the other events that have happened.

I said it before, we have 3 very good things to discuss today before we decide on voting nolynch (well maybe not Obzy claim as he is dead now.).

We have to get a correct lynch, whether it be today, or tomorrow after voting nolynch. And the way I see it voting nolynch today could help the mafia as much is it might help us.

On April 12 2013 02:02 Warent wrote:
@TheRavensName

I can't really provide an answer to this.


The medic claim was the most important event no one had looked at more closely. It had plenty of scum potential! I actually didn't think Obzy just would give up, and I was suspicious towards him from after day 1. Why? Him hardcore defending Rain didn't make sense to me, it did to you? In any case my analysis was still correct - but my conclusion was wrong. It was a horrible town move. Had been an at least an interesting scum move.


I'm sleeping when most of the actions are happening, sorry about that, but can't really do much about it.

I really don't understand do you think I'm working with Rainbow?

On April 13 2013 00:17 Warent wrote:
Fish: Earlier you complain about the way I was defending myself. The problem is: I don't even know what to defend myself against. There isn't even a (real) case against me. And currently the two players who are voting for me are my scum reads (rain and jarjar) - Doubt they will change their minds. I asked for questions, if you have any, please ask away.

I know many of you trust Rain. Consider this - if you think I'm working with Raven, why have we been focusing so much on trying to convince you guys about Rain rather than someone with fewer supporters?

This is a critical time, were is JarJar, were is Moloch (?) (I really expected him to be more active, but he haven't posted during the last 24 hours or so...). Who benefits from conversation right now? Town does. Why? I AM town - and I am set to be lynched. There is no NEED for scum to act right now. Town on the other hand. We are running out of time.

Seriously, look at jarjar, day 1 and day 3. Provide a terrible case -> go into lurker mode.

On April 13 2013 00:50 Warent wrote:


That's a lie. Lynch from day one and day two in spoilers.

+ Show Spoiler +

I did not Lynch them. And why the hell would I get rid of Saraf if I wanted to lynch you day2?

On April 13 2013 01:10 TheRavensName wrote:

Oh, so the exact same thing you did?

On April 13 2013 01:20 TheRavensName wrote:

How terrible would scum have to be to claim cop last day with no reasoning other than trolling? Rainbows terrible

On April 15 2013 20:21 Smancer wrote:
Okay, is it just me being paranoid, or does that seem way too easy to anyone else?

Either A) Jarjar is scum and his one left scumbuddy is jumping on to look like town,

or B) Jarjar is town and mafia is happy to lynch him.

On April 17 2013 09:54 Fishgle wrote:
rainbows, you're crazy. TRN has been revealed as scum, and i still don't think TRN is scum. There's no way he can be scum. You're obviously fake-claiming.

On April 06 2013 12:40 Rainbows wrote:
So everyone is clear: Top 3 are TRN, JJD, NW.

On April 18 2013 04:06 TheRavensName wrote:

Told you NW was just some idiot lol. The man needed at least one game where he wasn't on the verge of death, don't you think?

On April 18 2013 04:19 Hapahauli wrote:


The reason people weren't listening to your case against TRN seriously was because of how you were presenting yourself in-thread. You lost control of your emotions and were coming across as extremely unstable and hot-headed. No one is going to listen to a player like that, no matter how good your case is. . It was only when you calmed down in later days did people start taking a serious look at TRN.