Newbie Mini Mafia LIV

On March 26 2014 12:17 IAmRobik wrote:





You, sir, lack reading comprehension. Of course I'm town. I don't get rolled mafia on TL. It's the greatest feeling ever. Being scum sucks, and I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

On March 26 2014 12:49 IAmRobik wrote:
I ask you because sqrt said he's off to bed and it seems that you and I are the only ones left here.

Back to the topic at hand, why didn't you give a read on the other two and deflect onto a pointless question about why I directed the question AT YOU. If I knew where you stood on people, if you expressed those opinions in the thread, I wouldn't have to ask you, now would I?

On March 26 2014 13:03 OnceKing wrote:
Cavalinho, what do you think of the fact that Robik seems to have an awful lot of reads so quickly?

On March 26 2014 13:08 OnceKing wrote:
I talked about policy to bring us out of RVS. Your turn. What do you think of the fact that Robik seems to have so many reads so quickly?

On March 26 2014 13:09 Pixalated wrote:
If I'm missing something please explain why you think that someone bringing something up to get town to actually discuss something instead of talking fluff = scum. And why asking dumb questions = town.

On March 26 2014 13:12 OnceKing wrote:
Oh and here's another fun question for you Cav:
Why do you need me to answer your question in order to answer mine? Are we playing truth or dare (without dare)? Are you trying to get out of answering questions until later?

On March 26 2014 13:47 Eden1892 wrote:
Other quick thoughts:

- Pixalated is correct to point out that OK brought the game out of the joke phase and now that I'm reading his last couple posts I'm nodding in agreement. Slight town lean because his thought process is following mine pretty well. Wouldn't clear him based off that but it's fine for a few hours in.
- OnceKing town lean for now, moved the game out of the joke phase, Robik tried pushing an opportunistic lynch on him; I think Robik is scum and busing his teammate so early is stupid.
- Cavalinho arguably looks worse than Robik for just echoing Robik's bad points and promising to go reread an old game then not posting any findings.

On March 26 2014 15:32 Eden1892 wrote:
Are there any good players in this game?

On March 26 2014 15:46 Eden1892 wrote:
No, I'm not. I'm not surprised that you would egregiously mischaracterize my argument instead of addressing it, but that doesn't mean it goes away.

What OnceKing did wasn't "weird" at all. You kept and keep pushing the idea that it is while refusing to talk about how it's weird or how it being weird matters. It reeks of someone trying to spread doubt and confusion instead of clarifying the game state. Your questioning him was awkward and looked like you were trying to look like you were getting something done without really doing anything helpful. You haven't been trying to help us find scum, you've just been making unhelpful comments about how weird someone's play is or references to past games that we aren't playing.

On March 26 2014 16:24 Eden1892 wrote:
OK town, so Cavalinho is either terrible at reading comprehension or trying to distort what I'm saying. Let's review.

Again it's not that he said OnceKing's start was weird, it's that he didn't do anything to figure out why it was weird or tell us how it was weird. He asked OK why OK made a post about policy lynching lurkers, OK said it was to get the town out of RVS. That's not weird. Cavalinho didn't bother to respond to him and then kept repeating himself about how weird it was. No explanation as to why or how that's weird, no attempt to develop OK's response, nothing.

His questions didn't have any apparent direction or purpose to them. He asked OK why OK made the post, OK gave a good answer aaaand... Cavalinho drops it like a hot potato. No follow up? Nothing? Why are we supposed to be convinced that OK is weird or scum or whatever when you're just asking questions to ask them and not developing any insights from them? He asserts that he was asking questions because he didn't understand what was going on, but you'll notice that he doesn't acknowledge OK's answer at all. Instead he starts playing reactively, answering OK's questions and then dropping the line of discussion. That's not what people do when they're trying to understand what's going on. He vaguely talks around the issue right before I prodded him, saying that he thinks OK's start was still weird, but that he "[doesn't] have any real reason to think [OK] is mafia" because of his "last accusatory post" (what post is this?) and he "seems townie, getting information and generally being one of those obvious town players" (this doesn't actually say anything about why he doesn't think OK is mafia; we know that he wouldn't think that because he thinks OK seems town, why does he?)

I also happen to think his OMGUS vote is him trying to look innocent because he's aware of his meta (not the post beforehand he noted that Robik townread him in a previous game because he OMGUS'd then), but that can go either way. What's telling is that he fails to develop his vote, he just puts it down and insists it'll be me or him today. That's dumb and not what a town player should be doing.

Cavalinho is my best read for mafia right now.

On March 27 2014 00:33 OnceKing wrote:
##UNVOTE

About Cavalinho:
I agree that he's suspicious in that he hasn't contributed a lot of original content. However, I disagree with Eden's statement that "blatantly riffing off of Robik" makes him scum. As seen here:

This is just an "me too" post which... doesn't really say a lot about his alignment. I'm most bothered by this:

This is an overreaction and he's trying too hard to look like an indignant townie. He did the same thing in a previous game but the context is not the same -- last time he did this by attacking Amiko once Amiko said that he was just agreeing with something other players said before but before this he voices no suspicion of Eden, and in fact this post doesn't really voice suspicion of Eden either! Instead Cavalinho just places down a vote which gets no justification when we're well past so-called RVS.
##VOTE: Cavalinho.

About LT:
Gonna have to disagree with you guys, LT made an honest mistake and got impatient in pulling the trigger.

sqrtofneg1 - What do you think of the interactions between IAmRobik, Eden, Cavalinho and Lord Tolkien?
Cavalinho - Are you saying that if we lynch you today and you flip town we should lynch Eden? And more pressingly, why shouldn't we lynch you? (don't just say "I'm town")
LT - Yes, actually I am getting flashbacks to Cav's mislynch on Day 1 of our last newbie game. But it's been a while and he's aware of his own playstyle. However, here's something interesting. He's brought it down to "me or you". What do you think of this?

On March 27 2014 01:05 Eden1892 wrote:
You're talking around the points I made -- again -- and making really stretched parallels to another game -- again -- in an attempt to distort what I'm saying -- again.

For the rest of the town, here are the issues with Cavalinho's last post:
- He's distorting my arguments here. Specifically: he's framing my expectation that his questions have some purpose to them to mean that I expect him to walk us through every thought he has on the game; he's misinterpreting a question I posed ("why does he think OK is not mafia?" into "why does he think OK is mafia?") to avoid answering it; and he's introducing things I didn't talk about at all (him sleeping and not scumhunting as a result) in an effort to garner sympathy or otherwise discredit my arguments.
- He's still not explained his vote for me at all. In fact he's claiming to have sheeped onto a vote...? But he's the only one voting for me.

On March 27 2014 01:14 OnceKing wrote:
So Cav, who do you think is scum then?
I don't understand your logic for why my post on policy was strange -- people were joking around and posting stupid stuff and then I made it so that people would no longer post stupid stuff. Did you want the amount of stupid stuff to continue to pile up? How else are we supposed to get into discussion mode?
As I observed, this isn't the same exact reason why you died: the context is a bit different. You were already suspicious of Amiko that game, you were never suspicious of Eden this game and suddenly you place a kneejerk vote on him. wtf?

On March 27 2014 01:31 Eden1892 wrote:
I don't think that Cavalinho has really addressed the bulk of my concerns with his play so far, and I also don't think it's by accident, but I find myself unable to articulate why I don't like his last post, which is starting to make me reconsider. A lot of the things I'm still having issues with right now -- the tone and writing style, the apparent directionless demeanor of his questions, my read on why he OMGUS'd then -- are mostly unfalsifiable, which is a problem.

One major outstanding issue though is his rationale for voting for me. Everything that he said about me in the one post where he's explained himself is false, and his vote appears to be contingent on Last Tolkein being town. However, he voted for me before I said anything about LT. Thus the rationale he provided cannot be the original rationale he had for voting for me.

I would still prefer Lord Tolkein as I think it's obvious that he lied initially about his reads and then kept telling lies to cover up the first ones. I think my case on LT is stronger.

On March 27 2014 02:51 Eden1892 wrote:
I'm going to address you directly once more, Cavalinho, and then until you demonstrate you're capable of reading properly and/or arguing in good faith, I'm not going to address you further.

There's a plethora of things you haven't addressed. The issue is that most of them aren't really arguable (not in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument but more literally that they can't be argued). You're doing a lot of subtle things with the way you write; I raised the example of how your tone kept changing to match what Robik was doing re: OnceKing, for instance. You haven't said anything about it. I don't expect you to say anything productive or helpful, though, on that front, and it isn't worth arguing out. (You will say that either I am misinterpreting your tone or that your tone changes are coincidental, and it will simply be up to the audience to decide whether you are lying or I am wrong.)

Even still, there are things I've raised which you could have argued but have elected not to argue, probably because they're unarguable (in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument). You've repeatedly straw manned the arguments against you instead of addressing them charitably and reasonably. At no point did your questions, and responses to the answers you received, have any apparent constructive direction. Your voting rationale given was entirely post-hoc and despite your last message here it's obvious that you are sticking to your vote in spite of the overwhelming evidence against it, probably because you're desperate scum latching onto any last shred of capacity to cast doubt on me that you have.

---

Why are all of you so quick to accept Tolkein's blatant lies about his test? Please. Until someone can rebut the five points raised in this post and establish that none of them are proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Tolkein is lying, no one in this thread has any reason to believe that Tolkein is being honest.

On March 27 2014 02:51 Eden1892 wrote:
I'm going to address you directly once more, Cavalinho, and then until you demonstrate you're capable of reading properly and/or arguing in good faith, I'm not going to address you further.

There's a plethora of things you haven't addressed. The issue is that most of them aren't really arguable (not in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument but more literally that they can't be argued). You're doing a lot of subtle things with the way you write; I raised the example of how your tone kept changing to match what Robik was doing re: OnceKing, for instance. You haven't said anything about it. I don't expect you to say anything productive or helpful, though, on that front, and it isn't worth arguing out. (You will say that either I am misinterpreting your tone or that your tone changes are coincidental, and it will simply be up to the audience to decide whether you are lying or I am wrong.)

Even still, there are things I've raised which you could have argued but have elected not to argue, probably because they're unarguable (in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument). You've repeatedly straw manned the arguments against you instead of addressing them charitably and reasonably. At no point did your questions, and responses to the answers you received, have any apparent constructive direction. Your voting rationale given was entirely post-hoc and despite your last message here it's obvious that you are sticking to your vote in spite of the overwhelming evidence against it, probably because you're desperate scum latching onto any last shred of capacity to cast doubt on me that you have.

---

Why are all of you so quick to accept Tolkein's blatant lies about his test? Please. Until someone can rebut the five points raised in this post and establish that none of them are proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Tolkein is lying, no one in this thread has any reason to believe that Tolkein is being honest.

On March 27 2014 07:14 sqrtofneg1 wrote:

Yes.

On March 27 2014 07:19 Eden1892 wrote:
Cavalinho I'm off of you and trying hard to get someone besides you lynched, calm down and help me kill Tolkien if you think he's scum.

On March 27 2014 07:24 sqrtofneg1 wrote:

Slightly.
Putting off that question for a long time really looked scummy.

On March 27 2014 13:11 Eden1892 wrote:
hurp derp a durp herp hep C

**nearly positive that both Cavalinho and sqrt are town

On March 28 2014 00:58 Pixalated wrote:
Cav opinions on my read on LT?

On March 28 2014 01:34 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
How can LT vote for himself? I thought that was against the rules.

On March 28 2014 01:40 Eden1892 wrote:
Actually I guess ignore all of that.

Going to class soon and then I'm rereading the whole thread. I'm starting to get pissed off about this game because we have three wagons now (Tolkien, Cavalinho, sqrt) and two others (Valenius and Pixalated) that people are trying to start, way late in the phase. Seems like there's a lot of indecisiveness and general bullshit flying around here. It's really getting me mad how people are bitching about me "tunneling" when I'm obviously not, and then don't have a clear direction themselves for who needs to die instead.

On March 28 2014 01:40 RolandJarvis wrote:


If you think I'm mafia, and you want people to vote for me, nothing is more convincing than putting your own vote on me.

On March 28 2014 01:44 IAmRobik wrote:

I was planning on hammering the shit out of whoever I thought was more mafia at the end of the day if the wagons were close because I trust me to have the hammer than anyone else.

As for what I've brought to the table with Cava and LT...well...that doesn't really matter. I actually don't know if I've brought up any new content regarding them, I'd have to reread my posts. What I do know is that I have a pretty large town circle, and I'm happy lynching outside of it, and those two are DEFINITELY outside of it.

On March 28 2014 05:17 Eden1892 wrote:
Scum team is Cavalinho and Robik.

Cavalinho because he hasn't been scumhunting all game and because he never really addressed the case I built against him back earlier in the day. Case is obvious and has been elaborated on at length, no worries here.

Robik because he came in and knocked the Cavalinho lynch off-course, and I later got him to admit Cavalinho was scummier than his target Pixalated (which was a weak target to settle on anyway), but now he's voting for Tolkien who he has as less scummy than Cavalinho. Their interaction at the beginning that I harassed Cavalinho over makes more sense now that I have Robik as the other scum; they were both fishing for an easy case against OnceKing and Cavalinho just followed Robik's lead. I've also been getting a really weird feeling about how Robik comes in acting like this badass at mafia, but whenever he talks to me he's just a monstrous pussy afraid to challenge me. Only makes sense if he's mafia and knows he can't afford to fuck with me.

If Cavalinho flips scum then kill Robik tomorrow for sure. If he doesn't then I'll reassess but I'm really confident now in both of them being the scumteam.

On March 28 2014 05:43 Eden1892 wrote:
zzz I don't care about whether you bm or not, it's not about that. (Although I wish you would, and could without getting warned, because I think it'd be fucking hilarious.) You've been not-a-douche to everyone, that's not the point. Your attitude toward me during the game has definitely been a lot more deferential than it has to the other players. There's a difference between "not bm" and "being deferential." You're scared of challenging me because I put the press on you early and it shows. Town!Robik wouldn't be afraid to challenge me.

Why do you give a shit about me getting on an easy wagon if you're sure that wagon is scum? You know there's no way in hell that Cavalinho and I are the scumteam.

On March 28 2014 05:45 Eden1892 wrote:

Hahahah, ordering me around, that's cute.

Nah, vote stays on you. You haven't done anything to scumhunt or help town. Yeah the focus has been on you. So? You take it off of you by scumhunting. You haven't been doing that.

On March 28 2014 05:54 Eden1892 wrote:

I believe this

/s

On March 28 2014 06:06 IAmRobik wrote:
I refuse to talk about this claim other than that we're not lynching him. It should be blatantly obvious why talking about the claim is really fucking bad.

On April 03 2014 08:29 Lord Tolkien wrote:
I really do have to apologize since I basically let town down D3. Pretty shitty of me, but I didn't have time to post due to REASONS. And nothing really influenced my reads away from sqrt (I apologize for focusing you since D1 lol) and Robik. Should I have focused Robik first? Perhaps, but I just felt more strongly about sqrt, who I really do feel shouldn't have (edit: been so scummy/scurred).


I should have believed in the WIFOM, because the first Day 1 exchange was pretty damn ridic and I don't know why I wrote them off as being mafia together because of it initially. It should've been a telltale sign, and I really should have tried to question the sqrt lynch. If I had the time to sit down and REALLY scrutinized my own reads and other people's analysis, I feel I could've won this for town, but I didn't have/do either.

So ye, I feel like I really dropped the ball here HARD (and hypocrisy since my D2 was entirely devoted to trying to get people to fking post, Pixal pls wtf).

Lessons I've learned from this game:
1) How to approach blue role claims. AKA not lynch them. Huehuehue. Story of this game is "town decides to lynch ALL da blues". And more importantly, learn to discern blue from scum. This is my first mafia game since LII, so that should tell you how little I generally play mafia, and how much I need to improve on in general.

2) That I now apparently have a scummy town D1 meta. Lynch me next game if I appear town D1 gaiz (if I actually have time to play, mafia too exhausting and time-consuming).

3) Lend more weight to nightkills and their implications.

4) l really, REALLY should believe in the WIFOM. Especially something as obvious as that, but I really didn't believe that scum would be so forward Day 1 and be the center of attention.

5) how2scumbait (don't)

http://www.quicktopic.com/50/H/227Jz8ekq7iaT
For my coach QT.


In general,

D1: I just don't feel Cav put together an adequate defense and his posting pattern made me misread him (sorta again), and I felt a parity cop is less impactful and guaranteed than a cop, and a blue role with no impact should have no bearing on (edit: his lynch at the time. I mean there's not much else I could do because I was the other candidate [and I apparently can't vote myself], and no one was swapping onto sqrt at the time so...In hindsight, it would've been to lynch myself, or oneo f hte two blues. lulz, mafia played well this game).

And my view going into D3 is that there was a coinflip chance the RB claim and medic claim was bogus even without a counterclaim, and thus I chose to rely on my then-present reads, which was fk that, I'm pretty sure he's scummy. As was pointed out in obs QT, I should've noticed his consistent medic pattern, but hindsight 20/20 (and you gaiz got a mod confirm for him), or gone for my other scum read (Robik), even if only to check reactions.


Also,

Howard.