[W][M] Newbie Mafia XXI

On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:

1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.

2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.

3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.

4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:

1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)

and of course QT.

Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago.

On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:

Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you.

I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours.

I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop.

Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you.

On June 06 2016 05:08 Tictock wrote:


I kinda agree, the general flow of the game and how the votes are going seem to signal a very low key scum team that is probably not up for lynch atm.

QT is also giving me vibes that he's not really to concerned with the pressure atm which isn't really in line with a try-hard scum playing the activity game. I'm wondering if he's a player more like Moosy who's play can be pretty questionable and is lynchbait. While he's kinda all over the place and I have a hard time tracking much line of thought he is being pretty consistent about putting stuff out there.

Is your desire to lynch kush based on meta, or is it more policy due to him being pretty lackluster and only pushing a plynch himself?

I think I might be more keen on lynching Skynx myself.

On June 06 2016 05:09 Jealous wrote:

Yea, I made that mistake, again (posted this on the previous page), please disregard that last line of reasoning.

However, this does not make the rest of the post "OMG so wrong." I stand by it.

If you're saying the truth and you flip VT tomorrow, that would be unfortunate but not as bad as you being a blue PR, so that's taken a load off my shoulders ^^ If you're lying and you're scum, then that would be great and I'd be a boss. I'm liking this scenario.

On June 06 2016 05:20 Tictock wrote:


Ah yea, it is true the disparity in his pre-game to in-game is real.

I thought he mostly plays from work so was kinda giving his low activity on the weekend a pass.