Mini Mafia IV

On January 21 2011 05:14 ShoCkeyy wrote:


Of course I was laying low seeing as all the active kids kept dying first, because everyone in that game was so dumb to realize who were the mafia either way. I was dumb as well, but hey it happens. That game actually has showed me a lot more that the way I played mafia back in the day has changed than the way we play it now.

And Pandain, if you read the thread, I clearly state I can't post till I get out of work. I will try and post from my phone as much as possible, but that is such a pain in my ass. Either way, I will post some more when I do get home.

On January 21 2011 01:47 Pandain wrote:
Hello everyone its Pandain the Panda, hoping he won't ruin town again for everyone. And as Pandain always learned when young, the best way to get from A to B when theres a brick wall in front of you is to not go around the wall, but keep on running into it until it breaks!

In other news, just some general thoughts:
1.Blue's dont claim unless you are about to be lynched. If you find a red, don't claim. Instead prepare an analysis on him and get him lynched without claiming. If you find green, and they're about to be lynched, express support for him, but don't claim unless its near lylo.

2.I agree we should not let inactives survive in this town. But considering we've hardly started, "inactives" is hardly the word to call them. So let's get things moving.

##Vote Nemesis



What is this? Clarify this for me, because as I understand right now you just said we should lynch scum, and then say we should lynch inactives.

Plus I want to see more contribution.

Come on people, pressure is pointless if only one person votes. Let's get things moving.

On January 20 2011 22:24 Jackal58 wrote:

I would argue that lynching the most active players on day 1 is a mistake. Unless of course active player A states "I am scum" which probably isn't going to happen.

On January 21 2011 01:47 Pandain wrote:
Hello everyone its Pandain the Panda, hoping he won't ruin town again for everyone. And as Pandain always learned when young, the best way to get from A to B when theres a brick wall in front of you is to not go around the wall, but keep on running into it until it breaks!

In other news, just some general thoughts:
1.Blue's dont claim unless you are about to be lynched. If you find a red, don't claim. Instead prepare an analysis on him and get him lynched without claiming. If you find green, and they're about to be lynched, express support for him, but don't claim unless its near lylo.

2.I agree we should not let inactives survive in this town. But considering we've hardly started, "inactives" is hardly the word to call them. So let's get things moving.

##Vote Nemesis



What is this? Clarify this for me, because as I understand right now you just said we should lynch scum, and then say we should lynch inactives.

Plus I want to see more contribution.

Come on people, pressure is pointless if only one person votes. Let's get things moving.

On January 21 2011 06:50 Pandain wrote:


I don't like this post either. Let's take a look at it.

First off, lynching inactives itself is a bad strategy. I shall be lenient to him because even I make this mistake, but lynching inactives is a horrible thing to do.

When we say "lynch inactives", we mean "lynch lurkers." We want to differentiate the lurkers from the inactives/bored.
You are just arguing semantics here. Besides, you can't exactly tell a lurker from an inactive unless they make it obvious.

If we say we'll lynch the inactives, the inactives won't respond.
IF we say we'll lynch the inactives, the bored won't really respond.

Only the mafia will respond if we say lynch the inactives. Which is why you never want to end up LYNCHING an inactive, just pressuring all of them to post.
If they don't respond, that does not necessarily mean that they are bored townies. Just take a look at TMM3. Subversion(he was red that game) claimed he was roleblocked, and then disappeared afterwards. There were plenty of FoS on him after that, and he was up for lynch next day, but he still didn't respond. It is pretty much impossible to tell the difference between a lurker and an inactive townie.


Furthormore, he just repeated information without actually adding anything to it. Finally he goes for the "easy" kill.
There was pretty much nothing else that people were discussing about. I gave my opinion on what we were currently talking about. What else could I have added to the discussion? It is not like anyone else was trying to generate new topic. At least I was trying to further the discussion.

I just woke up, I was still half-asleep when I checked this forum. I rather dislike it when town loses because everyone is inactive, and when I saw Shockeyy post "sorry I'm inactive, I promise I'll be active later," I wanted to pressure him to make sure that he actually keeps his promise and doesn't disappear as soon as we forget about him.

This is typical mafia to me.

I now offer Nemesis as a viable option for a real lynch.

On January 22 2011 04:12 chaoser wrote:


You've spoken but all you've given is definitions and what we SHOULD do with no clear plans/idea on how we're going to even go about doing it (differentiate between town lurkers/inactives and mafia lurkers/inactives). You stated that your main goal is get town to be active which is a non-committal thing to do. Your analysis of Nemesis was pretty bad, pretty much calling him out on saying pretty much the same things everyone else was saying/everyone else usually says on Day 1 (Lynch inactives, blah blah blah). Though I do think Nemesis' over aggressiveness was a bit weird, I think your actions/posts haven't been much better. So I'm keeping my vote on you for the time being.

On January 22 2011 02:08 Pandain wrote:
Finally, I've decided that I don't think Shockkey is scum. He's playing his norm, in fact, even has contributed more with a semi analysis of Nemesis. I think Hesmyrr is a far better person to vote considering he has barely talked at all.

On January 22 2011 06:02 ShoCkeyy wrote:


Go ahead and lynch me so you can get no information what so ever, now you're really being stupid and playing horribly. Either way, still at work, then I have school tonight, so I won't be able to post till like 10pm Eastern.

On January 22 2011 06:12 chaoser wrote:


Aside from not posting much, I don't know how I feel about shockeyy. i'm going to stick to my vote on pandain. Why go for someone he supports when you can just go for the main target. His jumping around on votes really makes me suspicious.

On January 22 2011 07:58 Hesmyrr wrote:
      Pandain
Ah, yes. "his disastrous attack on me" =/ See my prior post for response. What I want to discuss is the thing I found worth noting.

While I can see why he would vote me for pressure purposes, this is just poorly supported. I mean really poorly supported. Check the third quote by me he writes about, I will go into detail there. Okay, I realized that thing about "huge scum tell" could have come from me writing "hugely anti-town (thus a scumtell)" which can be read wrongly I guess. But the thing is how the hell could he believe that my previous post was about inactivity being huge scum tell when LSB's post I was replying to was basically arguing why lynching inactive is a good thing. His line of attack on me just felt really unnecessarily forced.