STAR WARS Mafia [ENDGAME]

[a2thezebra]

MacDougall

Let's do this.

Wait a second this is your ACTUAL vote? Did you forget votes are not changeable or are you this confident Mac is scum?

No and perhaps.

Hence why I said "forget" rather than "know."

Please elaborate. This goes for you and Mac.

[Marmot]

MacDougall

Let's do this.

Wait a second this is your ACTUAL vote? Did you forget votes are not changeable or are you this confident Mac is scum?

No and perhaps.

Hence why I said "forget" rather than "know."

Please elaborate. This goes for you and Mac.

I don't want to blow up.

Also for the purposes of observance.

[a2thezebra]

Pssshhh whatever

[a2thezebra]

Why don't we all just say nothing about our reads (or fucking non-changeable early ass VOTES) "for the purposes of observance" and this post here can be the last one before there's two minutes left until the day is over and nobody knows who to lynch.

[a2thezebra]

Mac, tell me you'll give us something to work with.

[Matt]

Did someone say policy lynch?

[MacDougall]

MacDougall

Let's do this.

Wait a second this is your ACTUAL vote? Did you forget votes are not changeable or are you this confident Mac is scum?

No and perhaps.

Hence why I said "forget" rather than "know."

Please elaborate. This goes for you and Mac.

enrique was my day 0 ping.

[Savage]

2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.

I want everyone to discuss this.

How are these two statements compatible?

I don't see discussing mechanics as a good or bad thing. It's really just neutral because anyone can talk about it with no relevance to ones alignment. I don't think looking to the planet vote will be viable to find scum because there is no method that you can predict until at least late game to confirm you have mafia.

What is the voting format? Bold and underline? Sorry if I don't post a lot the first phase or two. I mostly observe when I go to another forum to play mafia. Of course I will be as up to date with the thread as possible. Just gonna go a bit slower than norm the first phase or so.

[a2thezebra]

You're telling me this wasn't a joke?

Why doesn't Yavin have any votes? You guys realize that's literally like the civvie base, right?

And yet you didn't vote for it.

Enrique is scum, confirmed.

[MacDougall]

Why doesn't Yavin have any votes? You guys realize that's literally like the civvie base, right?

And yet you didn't vote for it.

Enrique is scum, confirmed.

I made this fairly sarcastic but partially meaningful accusation because I found it strange that enrique rather than voting for the base and explaining that as his reason, just made this comment without voting. Indicating a cautiousness to make what seems to be a reasonably arbitrary decision. I felt it was a good idea to prod him on it.

His reaction.

I haven't voted at all. I was just wondering if there was a reason not to.

You're right, scum would heavily contemplate the potential of such a thing since their numbers are fewer ergo their demise has more of an impact on their team.

Wondering if there was a reason not to vote for Yavin? This was a strange thought imo. Why/how would there be such things on day 0 as reasons not to vote in a poll. It realistically is the most meaningless poll of the game. His cautiousness is strange.

All of the locations sound dangerous tbh

Hoth had like big yeti creature things. Not nice.

The above was his first post. Yet, he then went on to say that Yavin was the civvie base, and that it was weird that we weren't voting for it. Does that not mean that he actually didn't feel that they all sounded dangerous and that his first post was actually just non genuine fluff. We all know the first post is awkward as scum. This looks like an awkward scum first post.

His two reactions to me accusing him were "huh" and "uhh okie", so he has no desire to be engaged on the subject instead choosing to look elsewhere. Fine, perhaps he just sees the accusations as disingenous or non threatening. I see it as more of him attempting to just calmly dismiss them as me being overenthusiastic about what he'd like to put forth as something that's not a big deal.

He did end up voting for Yavin and called us crazy for not doing so.

Voted Yavin. You guys are all crazy.

Which is strange when he made comments about Endor and Tatooine, indicating that he was genuinely weighing up his options. If it was such an easy decision, why the hell didn't he make it sooner, and why was he looking at Endor or Tatooine as a potential option at all. If Yavin is obvious then no, not every planet is dangerous and why not just vote for it immediately?

Endor is actually a lot more appealing when you read the roles and realize we have an Ewok on our side. Maybe it's not so dangerous after all.

I think Tattooine, in the worst case scenario, would favor the Independents. Do we know what their win conditions are yet?

For a day 1 case, I think it's pretty good.

[Enrique]

thats like the biggest nonstory ive seen presented as a case on mafia

tbh i had no idea what "Yavin" was until i read the descriptions, at which point it was a bit of a no-brainer. like really? the place is literally the civvie base where the civvies do cool things in the movies. i DID consider my options (tattooine, endor) up until i found out about yavin. but then when it looked so good, surely i was missing something that kept people away from it? nobody gave it any consideration so i just put it down to lack of familiarity and went ahead and voted.

like i dont even understand what the baddie logic behind anything there would be.

[a2thezebra]

That's more like it. Response, Enrique?

[a2thezebra]

derp

[a2thezebra]

like i dont even understand what the baddie logic behind anything there would be.

See this is the same problem I had with MP regarding DDL (I know I said I wouldn't talk about him until he responded but I have to as an example OKAY?!) because it's not the actions themselves that could be interpreted as scummy because as scum you're not intending for those actions to be pointed out or even visible to anyone including yourself in the first place. These actions are products of a narrative that is simply more likely to be interpreted as scum than town, because it makes sense that you would be nervous about blending in as scum hence the inconsistencies of your voting, while the likelihood that you were simply going through the motions of researching the locations is less likely given the nature of some of your posts, at least in Mac's opinion.

I'm not fully convinced but this response of yours didn't help you. I don't think you're giving his case enough credit, yet you seem rather flustered as if it is in fact worth looking into.

[Enrique]

i mean, im replying. honestly i havent been putting enough energy into this game and i have very little idea of whats going on outside of mac building a narrative out of all my posts.

i disagree about there being any nervousness or inconsistencies in my voting. i considered some options, found one that actually managed to look appealing, and went for it.

[a2thezebra]

Hmmm...time will tell.

[Golden]

@savage - voting in the poll is sufficient.

Bold/underline is often used as a courtesy when votes are changeable, so that there is a record of who voted for who, or to tell people WHEN you voted, but it is not a requirement - especially when votes are not changeable.

It's still good to say you voted when you do, though.

[Glorfindel]

I think (like Savage) it's going to take me a little while getting into this game. My knowledge of the whole Star Wars theme could best be described as 'superficial' and having only played with one of you before makes this really hard in the context that I haven't any personal experience of your individual play styles Personally, I think I'm a better mid-game player anyway...

[Dom]

I have no idea what Dom understood, but I was just havin' fun with Roxy. I have no idea what Sorsha Day 0 means.

This is precisely what I understood.

[Sorsha]

I have no idea what Dom understood, but I was just havin' fun with Roxy. I have no idea what Sorsha Day 0 means.

You if all people should know what Sorsha day 0 means!!!

Just kidding. I'm catching up now...

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Spoiler: show

2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.

Well I got someone to start baddie hunting, so I guess it was successful in that sense at least.

Well I like to discuss tactics. Not the first game I've done that. In any case, I have no intention of using such methods as failproof evidence of anyone being mafia, while ignoring other evidence. I just want to have them in mind in case we need to use them later, or maybe help people have their own ideas on how we can use the game mechanics to find mafia.

I get what you're saying DDL, and I appreciate your efforts to look for certain strategies (assuming these efforts are genuine, but I'll get to that in a bit), but I don't think I fully understand your logic here.

I'm sure there would be plenty of civs as well as baddies who would avoid voting rather than risk being the last vote, so I'm not sure how that would make a player suspicious. Placing their own interests ahead of the town, sure, but not baddie per se.

Well I'm assuming the empire mafia knows what the planet is going to be destroyed is, so that means they wouldn't have to worry about being the last ones to vote in the other phases, but would have to worry in that specific phase where the planet explodes. I'm speculating that we could try to find that pattern. Of course there would be other players avoiding voting last, so it wouldn't be a conclusive evidence.

Of course, now that I've said that, they could also worry about it in every single phase just to attempt to mask the pattrn. Then again, if I get mafiosos to play in a non-optimal way just to avoid being found, that's a profit.

I love metagaming.

I agree with DFaraday. But more importantly, how would we able to find a pattern? What pattern? Assuming you're right and the empire knows which planet will be destroyed (which I wouldn't be too sure that that assumption is correct) that only means, as you said, they would only have to be cautious with that particular planet. One planet. So where's the pattern we're looking for? And you seem to be tip-toeing a bit here with your reasoning. Proposing a method of finding baddies only to follow it up with "so it wouldn't be conclusive evidence" makes me wonder why bring up that potential tactic in the first place? It seems like you're just saying things like this to appear as if you're contributing. And you make it worse by excusing that this imaginary pattern could be copied for each phase, so again, what's the point? And finally, how would you, and you mention you specifically rather than town as a whole, (why?) be able to get mafiosos to play in an unorthodox way to be spotted? Or am I simply misunderstanding your reasoning here? Please help me out here. Finally, to return to the original post:

Not the first game I've done that.

I'm not a fan of players hiding behind their meta especially in response to slight pings. Consider me slightly pinged as well.

zebra, I'm actually NOT pinged by DDL's logic here. He's right - if Tarkin chose one planet that gets blown up, the baddies know which one it is, so you can be damned sure they'll avoid voting last at that planet and only that planet. The rest of us will try not to vote last on EVERY planet. So if DDL hadn't said anything, we could've looked hindsight to see if anyone who normally votes late voted early on the day the planet blew up.

What pinged me was that he blew this angle by explaining it, and then went hyper-meta with it. And I'm also slightly pinged that you were so quick to join me here, but with a different point.

Okay I'll admit I kind of made a mistake there. I said what was on my mind, then I realized saying it might have ruined it, so I tried to find a silver lining by talking about the metagame thing, which admitelly I still think might work.

As for the thing about "tip-toeing" thing zebra accused me off, the thing is, I just wanted to make it clear I don't actually think this plan should be a way to spot mafia with 100% certainity. After I posted, I realized it was rubbing some people the wrong way. And I realized I might have become suspicious since I was proposing a "miraculous" way of finding mafia that many might disagree with (something people usually tend to suspect), so I tried to defuse the situation by making it clear I'm just suggesting a tool, not trying to make it the main way of finding mafia.

Also zebra, you keep accusing me of "trying to look like I'm contributing", but really you should look at the context of my posts. Who else was contributing on day 0? There was absolutely nothing to talk about back then, no debate going on, and I tried to spark a discussion to get the game moving, even if such a discussion was not directly useful to baddie hunting at first. Well, I work with what I've got. I wasn't trying to "look" contributive", I was trying to get the game out of day 0 stasis.

I think you're jumping too fast on people, honestly. Not just the (admitelly valid) suspicions on me, but also stuff like this:

Why are we being mean to Dragon? He voted Death Star

You're taking this Death Star enthusiasm to an uncomfortable extreme, Matt. Are you saying everyone who voted for the Death Star should be ignored when they appear suspicious?

You quoted what was a obvious joke post and tried to turn it into evidence. Like... chill. Not evey post from every player has to be mafia slipping. Like someone else said, it feels like you are all over the place.

[MacDougall]

Also zebra, you keep accusing me of "trying to look like I'm contributing", but really you should look at the context of my posts. Who else was contributing on day 0? There was absolutely nothing to talk about back then, no debate going on, and I tried to spark a discussion to get the game moving, even if such a discussion was not directly useful to baddie hunting at first. Well, I work with what I've got. I wasn't trying to "look" contributive", I was trying to get the game out of day 0 stasis.

I think you're jumping too fast on people, honestly. Not just the (admitelly valid) suspicions on me, but also stuff like this:

Why are we being mean to Dragon? He voted Death Star

You're taking this Death Star enthusiasm to an uncomfortable extreme, Matt. Are you saying everyone who voted for the Death Star should be ignored when they appear suspicious?

You quoted what was a obvious joke post and tried to turn it into evidence. Like... chill. Not evey post from every player has to be mafia slipping. Like someone else said, it feels like you are all over the place.

I don't think you're bad for it, and I don't think you're necessarily by virtue of my opinion wrong about Zebra but I do not agree with you. Telling someone to chill because they are flinging accusations around on day 1 is not what I would suggest at all. The more content, the more conversations, the more accusations the absolute better for the civ team. If you are pinged on day 1 by the most slight thing you need to be out with it and you need to force the player in question to explain it. Especially on day 1, if you want to find scum on day 1 or if you want to produce searchable content on day 1.

Responding to her pings, her accusations, like you have done is wonderful. If you think Zebra is scum for what she's doing that's wonderful too. But tactically I think if she wants to fling accusations around we should encourage it because if she's bad she's giving us opportunities to find out and if she's good she's going to ruffle some bad guy feathers.

[MacDougall]

The last thing you want to be doing is identifying a scum player by YOUR ping and telling them to stop what they are doing right? Is what you are criticising Zebra for scummy to you? If so, say so! If not, what is there to gain by telling her to pipe down?

[MacDougall]

I will add that after going over the conversation in question that you look very civ to me, Russ looks very civ to me and Zebra pinged me a little bit with her criticism of you.

Russ's point on her resonates with me.

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Look, if you wanna suspect people for the most random things and point that out, then by all means, be my guest.

But if I think some of those suspicions are misguided, I will point that out too, and I will point flaws in the person's logic.

When I say "chill", it's not as much as wanting zebra to stop (honestly, I don't mind either way, and I agree with you that dialogue is always useful), than it is to point something weird in her logic, and disagree with her method. Matt's post was an obvious OT post, and she responded very seriously to him. I also feel like she is going too far in some conclusions, like the whole thing about myself trying to "look useful". So I pointed that out too. I don't want people to stop talking, but if I feel people are taking the discussion to a wrong direction, and accusing people based on what I think is faulty logic, I will let them know it and I will attempt to change that direction.

Also just to make it clear: at this point, I don't think that's enough to suspect zebra more than just a ping, since a lot of my logical disagreement could be due to different playstyles. But she is rubbing me the wrong way.

(also I didn't know zebra was a "she" until your post, lol)

[MacDougall]

Look, if you wanna suspect people for the most random things and point that out, then by all means, be my guest.

But if I think some of those suspicions are misguided, I will point that out too, and I will point flaws in the person's logic.

When I say "chill", it's not as much as wanting zebra to stop (honestly, I don't mind either way, and I agree with you that dialogue is always useful), than it is to point something weird in her logic, and disagree with her method. Matt's post was an obvious OT post, and she responded very seriously to him. I also feel like she is going too far in some conclusions, like the whole thing about myself trying to "look useful". So I pointed that out too. I don't want people to stop talking, but if I feel people are taking the discussion to a wrong direction, and accusing people based on what I think is faulty logic, I will let them know it and I will attempt to change that direction.

Also just to make it clear: at this point, I don't think that's enough to suspect zebra more than just a ping, since a lot of my logical disagreement could be due to different playstyles. But she is rubbing me the wrong way.

(also I didn't know zebra was a "she" until your post, lol)

Oh btw nice to meet you.

OT posts are not always a bad thing to catch out scum on. I often get pinged by people talking about other stuff, if it seems like it's in lieu of actual contribution or seems like a forced line of dialogue. But largely that's a reasonable response DDL.

[MacDougall]

I can attest to what Golden is trying to express. I see nothing out of the ordinary for either DDL or zebra. on them, for sure, but no reason to eye them more than anyone else at this point.

zebra, you disagree with DDL's logic, yes? However, do you recognize that just because you think someone has reached a conclusion that you find faulty does not necessarily make them mafia?

Do you eye people who you don't suspect generally? Is everyone at a default status of being from you? I tend to feel people generally use that to denote a suspicion a level above default? Just trying to get a feel for you.

Is that last question actually meant to be serious? You are asking Zebra if she is aware that just because someone is wrong that doesn't mean they are mafia? That seems like a borderline disrespectful thing to ask someone who clearly has played this game many times MP.

I can attest to what Golden is trying to express. I see nothing out of the ordinary for either DDL or zebra. on them, for sure, but no reason to eye them more than anyone else at this point.

zebra, you disagree with DDL's logic, yes? However, do you recognize that just because you think someone has reached a conclusion that you find faulty does not necessarily make them mafia?

Of course. But if you read my original post you would know that it wasn't just because I disagreed with him that I was suspicious. It was mainly because I don't understand how someone could point something out and then immediately retract it. Like I said, it comes off as if that person is trying to look like they are contributing when they are not. I also said that it is questionable to use meta as a defense to a slight ping and I stand by that.

I can explain how this occurs to me personally. If I get pinged by something and then start trying to make a post about it but as I make the post I think a little harder on it and start to realise the disputable points of my ping I often trail off the post expressing disputable points to my own case. Personally I tend to do this more as a civ because as a scum I delete half made posts and stay silent far more often than I do as a civ. It is a null tell to me.

That being said on thinking of it, if the disputable detail completely refutes the original ping entirely I see no reason to actually finish making the post, and I probably should not do it, yet I do it quite frequently. A bad trait of mine. If the disputable detail only refutes part of the point, it's certainly worth expressing the entire point as well as the disputable detail, to save someone else from needing to do so and opening up an unnecessary line of discourse.

So that being said, in DDL's case, was there a point to completing the post in light of him disputing his own point? I'm going to say yes, because it is still a relevant subject. I can see a possibility where scum (or a player), if they were to know that the planet that the game is currently on is the planet that is to explode, does vote early in a revealing manner. If it is a player who generally holds their vote, or if it's a throwaway vote of epic proportions.

If we were to attempt to take advantage of the possibility of this we, as civs, would need to be razor sharp with how we choose and direct our own votes, which is something that many civ players fail to do as habitually votes go places out of lazy following of other peoples cases or on minor pings.

Ergo, I think while it's possible, it is incredibly unlikely for us to see anything revealing on it, except for perhaps analysing the previous days poll in reflection after the planet explodes. Even then a scum player would have to have been very poor to stand out.

tl;dr I can see why DDL started making the post. I can see less comprehensive reason for completing the posts but I can sympathise with him having done so. I see this whole discourse as about as likely to net scum as the subject that it is actually discussing.

As for using meta as a defense for a slight ping. I agree with you. A player should not call back on their own civ history as explanation for what they are doing as though it's a defense. I find that pingy too.

[MacDougall]

Gun to my head, I actually find Russtifinko suspicious in that exchange. He seems to express two distinct slight pings of both DDL and zebra, but it seems a bit opportunistic for him to say on the one hand that he is NOT pinged by DDL's logic but that he was pinged by DDL overexplaining it. Could possibly be a disingenuous way for Russtifinko to throw mud at two players who are relatively easier to lynch than the rest of us, particularly this early, since you both tend to post a lot and easily misinterpreted.

As someone who felt differently, I need to respond here. I think Russtifinko came across quite civ in execution, but in general calling someone out for agreeing with your case is a recurring scum tell, so I can see it going both ways.

In execution however Russtifinko read genuine to me in the exchange. This post of yours MP I would like to explore some.

For a start, nobody has put a gun to your head.

You feeling the need to begin your, what I am reading as rather forced, read on the play with that comment serves to downplay the intention of it imo.

You say he "seems" to express. MP, I don't think there was any seeming. He bluntly said he was pinged.

Your accusing him of being opportunistic, to me, is a little strange. I can't see how I would describe what he did as opportunistic. You have chosen words here that don't sit right with me. I can't see opportunism here because if he was an opportunistic scum, I believe he would have attacked the entire point, like what Zebra has done. Identifying part of the post as a ping, does not read opportunistic, it reads analytics and more genuine because it comes across more thoughtful.

Then you say "could possibly be" and "relatively" which I find similar to "seems" in that it comes across like you are almost, I won't say nervously, I will say cautiously throwing shade on Russ.

You are making posts that remind me of my own scum posts. You are over using words and phrases that hide an actual lack of belief in what you are saying.

[MacDougall]

Ok, so for the srs bsns I promised:

1) Voting Tatooine. Less for movie reasons and more because if we want info about Jabba's plans and our operatives found his plans in his palace, it makes sense to think his palace is a good place to start the search.

2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.

I'm rather confused why the focus of the conversation happens to be on the 2nd statement russ made here and not the first. I would encourage everybody to read the statement in red. To me this comes across as a scum hunting for third party players (or vise-versa).

I find this to be a very anti-town statement. What does everybody else think?

You raise a good point, and it actually ties in nicely with something I'm going to point out in a moment.

[MacDougall]

2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.

I want everyone to discuss this.

How are these two statements compatible?

How are they not? If he cannot work out whether a motivation is civvie or scum, how does him resolving to be pinged make anything but total sense?

I am casting a "fake vote" on Russtifinko. If the hosts allowed changeable votes, I would be casting my vote. Since they are not, I will withhold it. But consider this an official expression of suspicion on Russtifinko.

Russ, when you get a chance, can you answer some of my concerns?

Okay here's where my head is at.

MP as I've expressed I have now got a pretty clear scum read of you and it's because I sense a lack of belief in your case, especially on Russ. Not in the belief of him being scum, but in the points that you've used to reach that conclusion.

I think Russ, has by and large come across quite well, except for the point that bcornett swiftly pointed out, and that you did not point out despite apparently being onto him as scum.

The parts of his posts that you have highlighted do not read scum to me.

It looks to me like you are scum and you are day 1 distancing a scum teammate. Your case on him has all the hallmarks of it. You have confirmation bias when it comes to his posts.

Zebra looks like day 1 civ Zebra to me based on the three games I've played recently with Zebra. Things have pinged me, but Zebra has pinged me in all games we've played and has not yet flipped scum.

For now I am going to put on ice my scum read of enrique in light of his reaction to bcornett's point. My case on him was a day 1 case and does not come close to how I feel about this one, so allow me to put that back in my pocket for the time being. His response to bcornett's Russtifinko suspicion looks genuine and should Russ be scum, he would not be in my opinion.

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Aren't the Jabbas supposed to be a mafia team, not independents? We should be hunting for them.

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Also this "gun to the head" thing is something MP does all the time. He assumes someone is pointing a gun to his head to ask for his reads, then writes a wall of text on them. Otherwise, he asks other people to give him their "gun to the head" reads.

Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

[Marmot]

I think (like Savage) it's going to take me a little while getting into this game. My knowledge of the whole Star Wars theme could best be described as 'superficial' and having only played with one of you before makes this really hard in the context that I haven't any personal experience of your individual play styles Personally, I think I'm a better mid-game player anyway...

No worries Golrfindel (and Savage). Knowledge of the theme is never expected for games on this site, and you do have lots of players to meet.

Fortunately, baddie behavior is something that transcends mafia culture.

[Marmot]

OT posts are not always a bad thing to catch out scum on. I often get pinged by people talking about other stuff, if it seems like it's in lieu of actual contribution or seems like a forced line of dialogue. But largely that's a reasonable response DDL.

The point of the OT tags is to say something that can't be used against you.

Now if every single post someone makes is green, that's a different story.

[Marmot]

Also this "gun to the head" thing is something MP does all the time. He assumes someone is pointing a gun to his head to ask for his reads, then writes a wall of text on them. Otherwise, he asks other people to give him their "gun to the head" reads.

Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

MP does this all the time? Where did you learn this?

[Dragon D. Luffy]

Also this "gun to the head" thing is something MP does all the time. He assumes someone is pointing a gun to his head to ask for his reads, then writes a wall of text on them. Otherwise, he asks other people to give him their "gun to the head" reads.

Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

MP does this all the time? Where did you learn this?

Some time between the seventh and the eigth time I was asked to provide a gun to the head of someone during the first game I played here.

[Dragon D. Luffy]

OT posts are not always a bad thing to catch out scum on. I often get pinged by people talking about other stuff, if it seems like it's in lieu of actual contribution or seems like a forced line of dialogue. But largely that's a reasonable response DDL.

The point of the OT tags is to say something that can't be used against you.

Now if every single post someone makes is green, that's a different story.

Or you can do like a certain marmot: never use OT tags at all, and leave people guessing whether you are being serious or not (which is less than 10% of the time).

[Marmot]

OT posts are not always a bad thing to catch out scum on. I often get pinged by people talking about other stuff, if it seems like it's in lieu of actual contribution or seems like a forced line of dialogue. But largely that's a reasonable response DDL.

The point of the OT tags is to say something that can't be used against you.

Now if every single post someone makes is green, that's a different story.

Or you can do like a certain marmot: never use OT tags at all, and leave people guessing whether you are being serious or not (which is less than 10% of the time).

[Marmot]

Also this "gun to the head" thing is something MP does all the time. He assumes someone is pointing a gun to his head to ask for his reads, then writes a wall of text on them. Otherwise, he asks other people to give him their "gun to the head" reads.

Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

MP does this all the time? Where did you learn this?

Some time between the seventh and the eigth time I was asked to provide a gun to the head of someone during the first game I played here.

I forgot you were here for Death and Taxes. That was the first game on this site to see GTH reads.

[Tangrowth]

Also this "gun to the head" thing is something MP does all the time. He assumes someone is pointing a gun to his head to ask for his reads, then writes a wall of text on them. Otherwise, he asks other people to give him their "gun to the head" reads.

Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

MP does this all the time? Where did you learn this?

Some time between the seventh and the eigth time I was asked to provide a gun to the head of someone during the first game I played here.

Mac, I'll respond to you in just a bit here. Just finished catching up.

[Savage]

Of all the post I've read I haven't picked up nothing that stands out to me as scum behavior. So for now most of everyone who posted d1 is a neutral or town read to me. When I'm out of class I will re-read the phase just to make sure I haven't missed something and look at others cases

[Tangrowth]

Of all the post I've read I haven't picked up nothing that stands out to me as scum behavior. So for now most of everyone who posted d1 is a neutral or town read to me. When I'm out of class I will re-read the phase just to make sure I haven't missed something and look at others cases

Why neutral or town, rather than just neutral? Can you elaborate on any town reads you may have?

[DrWilgy]

╰། ◉ ◯ ◉ །╯

[Tangrowth]

Responses to Mac regarding my suspicion of Russtifinko and his suspicion of me (and tangently related subjects):

Spoiler: show

I can attest to what Golden is trying to express. I see nothing out of the ordinary for either DDL or zebra. on them, for sure, but no reason to eye them more than anyone else at this point.

zebra, you disagree with DDL's logic, yes? However, do you recognize that just because you think someone has reached a conclusion that you find faulty does not necessarily make them mafia?

Do you eye people who you don't suspect generally? Is everyone at a default status of being from you? I tend to feel people generally use that to denote a suspicion a level above default? Just trying to get a feel for you.

Is that last question actually meant to be serious? You are asking Zebra if she is aware that just because someone is wrong that doesn't mean they are mafia? That seems like a borderline disrespectful thing to ask someone who clearly has played this game many times MP.

I can attest to what Golden is trying to express. I see nothing out of the ordinary for either DDL or zebra. on them, for sure, but no reason to eye them more than anyone else at this point.

zebra, you disagree with DDL's logic, yes? However, do you recognize that just because you think someone has reached a conclusion that you find faulty does not necessarily make them mafia?

Of course. But if you read my original post you would know that it wasn't just because I disagreed with him that I was suspicious. It was mainly because I don't understand how someone could point something out and then immediately retract it. Like I said, it comes off as if that person is trying to look like they are contributing when they are not. I also said that it is questionable to use meta as a defense to a slight ping and I stand by that.

I can explain how this occurs to me personally. If I get pinged by something and then start trying to make a post about it but as I make the post I think a little harder on it and start to realise the disputable points of my ping I often trail off the post expressing disputable points to my own case. Personally I tend to do this more as a civ because as a scum I delete half made posts and stay silent far more often than I do as a civ. It is a null tell to me.

That being said on thinking of it, if the disputable detail completely refutes the original ping entirely I see no reason to actually finish making the post, and I probably should not do it, yet I do it quite frequently. A bad trait of mine. If the disputable detail only refutes part of the point, it's certainly worth expressing the entire point as well as the disputable detail, to save someone else from needing to do so and opening up an unnecessary line of discourse.

So that being said, in DDL's case, was there a point to completing the post in light of him disputing his own point? I'm going to say yes, because it is still a relevant subject. I can see a possibility where scum (or a player), if they were to know that the planet that the game is currently on is the planet that is to explode, does vote early in a revealing manner. If it is a player who generally holds their vote, or if it's a throwaway vote of epic proportions.

If we were to attempt to take advantage of the possibility of this we, as civs, would need to be razor sharp with how we choose and direct our own votes, which is something that many civ players fail to do as habitually votes go places out of lazy following of other peoples cases or on minor pings.

Ergo, I think while it's possible, it is incredibly unlikely for us to see anything revealing on it, except for perhaps analysing the previous days poll in reflection after the planet explodes. Even then a scum player would have to have been very poor to stand out.

tl;dr I can see why DDL started making the post. I can see less comprehensive reason for completing the posts but I can sympathise with him having done so. I see this whole discourse as about as likely to net scum as the subject that it is actually discussing.

As for using meta as a defense for a slight ping. I agree with you. A player should not call back on their own civ history as explanation for what they are doing as though it's a defense. I find that pingy too.

At this stage in the game, everyone is worthy of , since no one has reason not to be or to be anything stronger.

I didn't see it as disrespectful. zebra is a great player, but she tends to exhibit tunnel vision. I know it well because historically I've had problems with it myself. I was trying to get zebra to understand an outsider's (my) perception of her accusations, and discuss it with her. So, yes, it was meant to be serious, and with no disrespect. Why wouldn't it be?

I appreciate your thoughts on DDL here. You said the recall previous games behavior pings you; how does that mean you feel overall about DDL at the moment?

For this next quote, I'm going to respond with blue in a line-by-line fashion:

Spoiler: show

Gun to my head, I actually find Russtifinko suspicious in that exchange. He seems to express two distinct slight pings of both DDL and zebra, but it seems a bit opportunistic for him to say on the one hand that he is NOT pinged by DDL's logic but that he was pinged by DDL overexplaining it. Could possibly be a disingenuous way for Russtifinko to throw mud at two players who are relatively easier to lynch than the rest of us, particularly this early, since you both tend to post a lot and easily misinterpreted.

As someone who felt differently, I need to respond here. I think Russtifinko came across quite civ in execution, but in general calling someone out for agreeing with your case is a recurring scum tell, so I can see it going both ways.

I'm glad you've responded.

In execution however Russtifinko read genuine to me in the exchange. This post of yours MP I would like to explore some.

For a start, nobody has put a gun to your head.

I realize this. :P

I'm just indicating that, having read through that exchange, while I didn't see the suspicion on either zebra or DDL, I did pick something up on Russtifinko.

You feeling the need to begin your, what I am reading as rather forced, read on the play with that comment serves to downplay the intention of it imo.

How so? I'm only indicating my confidence level, which isn't very strong.

You say he "seems" to express. MP, I don't think there was any seeming. He bluntly said he was pinged.

Well, you're right, I suppose that's true. What I was trying to express though is that I failed to reconcile "can't decide civ/baddie" and "consider me pinged". To me, "pinged" indicates suspicion, which would then mean that he did decide on baddie, right?

Your accusing him of being opportunistic, to me, is a little strange. I can't see how I would describe what he did as opportunistic. You have chosen words here that don't sit right with me. I can't see opportunism here because if he was an opportunistic scum, I believe he would have attacked the entire point, like what Zebra has done. Identifying part of the post as a ping, does not read opportunistic, it reads analytics and more genuine because it comes across more thoughtful.

This is a good point that I didn't consider, particularly the underlined.

This does shake my read a bit. Nonetheless I still want to see if Russ can elaborate his thoughts in a manner I can better understand the civilian train of thought.

Then you say "could possibly be" and "relatively" which I find similar to "seems" in that it comes across like you are almost, I won't say nervously, I will say cautiously throwing shade on Russ.

That's just how I talk, for one. For two, "cautiously" isn't necessarily incorrect, since I am clearly showing through my word choices that I don't feel very strongly on my suspicion. Nonetheless, I wanted to pursue the suspicion and associated discussion.

You are making posts that remind me of my own scum posts. You are over using words and phrases that hide an actual lack of belief in what you are saying.

Can you elaborate on this? I'm not exactly sure what you mean.

Responses above within the quote.

Spoiler: show

2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.

I want everyone to discuss this.

How are these two statements compatible?

How are they not? If he cannot work out whether a motivation is civvie or scum, how does him resolving to be pinged make anything but total sense?

I am casting a "fake vote" on Russtifinko. If the hosts allowed changeable votes, I would be casting my vote. Since they are not, I will withhold it. But consider this an official expression of suspicion on Russtifinko.

Russ, when you get a chance, can you answer some of my concerns?

Okay here's where my head is at.

MP as I've expressed I have now got a pretty clear scum read of you and it's because I sense a lack of belief in your case, especially on Russ. Not in the belief of him being scum, but in the points that you've used to reach that conclusion.

I think Russ, has by and large come across quite well, except for the point that bcornett swiftly pointed out, and that you did not point out despite apparently being onto him as scum.

The parts of his posts that you have highlighted do not read scum to me.

It looks to me like you are scum and you are day 1 distancing a scum teammate. Your case on him has all the hallmarks of it. You have confirmation bias when it comes to his posts.

Zebra looks like day 1 civ Zebra to me based on the three games I've played recently with Zebra. Things have pinged me, but Zebra has pinged me in all games we've played and has not yet flipped scum.

For now I am going to put on ice my scum read of enrique in light of his reaction to bcornett's point. My case on him was a day 1 case and does not come close to how I feel about this one, so allow me to put that back in my pocket for the time being. His response to bcornett's Russtifinko suspicion looks genuine and should Russ be scum, he would not be in my opinion.

Maybe I have a different definition of "pinged" than others do? It seems as though he resolved it to be a mafia read, even if slight, which contradicts what he said before. That's what I was getting hung up on.

Not sure what I can say with regards to you perceiving my case as a lack of belief. To some degree, that is true; I didn't feel Russ was 100% mafia or anything even remotely close.

I appreciate that you have commented on the matter in such a level of detail, particularly since you disagree so strongly, and you've made points that are worth considering.

I didn't pick up bcornett's observation, no, I didn't think of it that way. I still think my observations made more sense.

I don't understand the logic behind jumping to the conclusion that I'm mafia distancing from a teammate. Because you think I've made points of suspicion that you believe make him appear the opposite, so thus I must be bad and he is on my team? Am I missing a link here?

[Tangrowth]

Also this "gun to the head" thing is something MP does all the time. He assumes someone is pointing a gun to his head to ask for his reads, then writes a wall of text on them. Otherwise, he asks other people to give him their "gun to the head" reads.

Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

Not yet, still trying to make sense of the thread, but I'm sure I'll force myself to make one before Day 1 ends.

2) DDL, I can't decide whether it's civ-ish or a baddie move to run through all the possible ways you'd catch a baddie based on the planet mechanic before we get a chance to actually use any of the methods. Consider me slightly pinged, there.

I want everyone to discuss this.

How are these two statements compatible?

I don't see discussing mechanics as a good or bad thing. It's really just neutral because anyone can talk about it with no relevance to ones alignment. I don't think looking to the planet vote will be viable to find scum because there is no method that you can predict until at least late game to confirm you have mafia.

What is the voting format? Bold and underline? Sorry if I don't post a lot the first phase or two. I mostly observe when I go to another forum to play mafia. Of course I will be as up to date with the thread as possible. Just gonna go a bit slower than norm the first phase or so.

I appreciate your commentary, Savage. To a point, I agree. What I was really wondering though is how to differentiate Russ's thoughts that influence his read of DDL (not being able to decide vs. slightly pinged).

Despite Mac's comments, this is something I'm still not understanding.

[a2thezebra]

Of all the post I've read I haven't picked up nothing that stands out to me as scum behavior. So for now most of everyone who posted d1 is a neutral or town read to me. When I'm out of class I will re-read the phase just to make sure I haven't missed something and look at others cases

It would be nice for you to distinguish which of your reads are neutral and which are town.

In response to DDL, I think you're misunderstanding the tone of most of my posts. Although I am being aggressive, that doesn't mean that I myself am sold on any of the accusations I'm dishing out. I fling shit to gauge reactions to help determine how well-founded my pings actually are, because in my experience it's usually in a scum's defenses towards other player's pings (rather than the original pings themselves) where they slip up and get lynched. I wasn't accusing you of appearing as if you were contributing, I was suggesting it, and you've responded pretty well (in my opinion) to my suspicion. The only thing I take issue with here is the notion that it was Day 0 and therefore no one else was contributing either; that's irrelevant in regards to you trying to appear more town than you are.

[DrWilgy]

Hi everyone!!!

ຈ ◞౪◟ຈ

[a2thezebra]

Regarding Mac's case on MP, I think while it may have some substance to it most of it is just pointing out differences between Mac's and MP's play style. I haven't seen MP do anything yet that has struck me as opportunistic or disingenuous, and I think Mac's case against Enrique is much more convincing.

[a2thezebra]

Hello, anybody home?

[Canucklehead]

Regarding Mac's case on MP, I think while it may have some substance to it most of it is just pointing out differences between Mac's and MP's play style. I haven't seen MP do anything yet that has struck me as opportunistic or disingenuous, and I think Mac's case against Enrique is much more convincing.

This is interesting to me, for a few reasons.
1) re: Mac's playstyle. Have you played with Mac a lot before? I've only played with him in World Reborn, and I was not super attentive in that game, but the Mac that I encountered there was NOTHING like this Mac so far (who is reading to me as calm, reasoned, and analytical). Which of these two Jekyll/Hyde sides of Mac is the "real" style, in your opinion? In what way do you see his playstyle as differing form MP's?
2) I didn't read Mac's case on MP (which I thought was good, since I almost always accuse MP of being too hedgey/non-committal, usually on Day 1 ) as accusing him of being "opportunistic" or "disingenuous", but of being overly cautious, non-committal, and wibbly-wobbly (technical term). If you don't agree with Mac's case on "opportunistic and disingenuous" grounds, do you agree with it on "wibbly-wobbly and over-cautious" grounds?