Best (Randomness) Of 2012 Game Over!

[rishaed]

I second the replacement of Vodean, especially if he doesn't show up soon. I'll support the motion on soundman as well but don't think it requires my vote for it.

[DoomYoshi]

I second the replacement of Vodean, especially if he doesn't show up soon. I'll support the motion on soundman as well but don't think it requires my vote for it.

He is already replaced...

[spiesr]

Spiesr, at what point is it acceptable to advocate the lynch of an absentee player?

A straightforward question with few simple answers. This is going to depend significantly on the huge variety or situations that could come up in a mafia game. The most obvious example would be when there is enough "evidence" against said player that any replacement would have little hope of actually changing the result. (I don't feel what you had on Vodean was enough to qualify for this, even with the Day 1 allowance.) Another possibility is when finding a replacement is impossible for unlikely. (Clearly that wasn't the case this time.) Cases where a player is active enough to avoid replacement but still doesn't contribute anything could also fall under that logic. A third major category is when the game is so large and has so much inactivity that culling is necessary to make it playable again.
Beyond these general cases and laundry list of specific scenarios are sure to exist that could justify such an action. However, since they are mostly irrelevant to this game I won't try to list/come up with them, but rather just point out a little bit of why it bothered me this time. The justification you attached, arguing the Vodean had an above average chance of being scum, was, in my opinion, not that solid of reasoning. As such, to me, it felt like either going after and inactive for being inactive or just a shot in the dark. While neither of those are that terrible themselves, at least for Day 1, I felt that doing so against a player who would not respond would not result in the quality of discussion I would like to get out of this Day. The way I see it, if we had lynched Vodean without him being replaced or something and he came up town we would only have two potential ideas to work from tomorrow, barring night actions. Either go after someone who bandwagoned a little too carelessly, or go for the person who started the whole thing, you. Here's an idea we can just skip to that part right now. Anyhow, with this game being somewhat on the smaller side and the potentially dangerous setup, I am warry of anything that could us to mislynch two days in a row.
So, if you still feel attached to your idea about the pms with respect to Vodean, I encourage you to use it now while there is someone who can say something in defense, which I feel will give us better discussion than if had occurred without a replacement.
Well, good luck deciphering this rambling mess...

[jonty125]

vodean was replaced by Hank44Soccer.

Prods are been sent to gregwolf121, Iron Butterfly and soundman

[DoomYoshi]

Easy to decipher spiesr.

Anyways, I generally agree with those situations. It wasn't a stab in the dark, I interpreted what jonty said as being unusual considering the timestamp on vodean's last visit. I interpreted this to mean only one thing - his pm was opened with another player. Since nobody else agrees with that interpretation, I am willing to drop it, but if hank flips scum later I will ROFL.

I want to stress that my case was based on something that jonty said, and that the fact that vodean was inactive was incidental to the case (although entirely part of why jonty said what he said).

Now, to the real meat of the question:

You want to target somebody who brings an inactive case (which was the smaller aspect of my case, I wouldn't honestly support a lynch on somebody for not confirming, you can check my meta for that). So, why not vote for the player who a)didn't notice the replacement and then started an inactive case or b) the player who blindly followed that case.

Spiesr, I don't want to pick on you, so:

Edoc: why are poor leaps of logic scummy, again?
rishaed: that's a double bandwagon on your part (me and then soundman)...

vote rishaed

[rishaed]

Easy to decipher spiesr.

Anyways, I generally agree with those situations. It wasn't a stab in the dark, I interpreted what jonty said as being unusual considering the timestamp on vodean's last visit. I interpreted this to mean only one thing - his pm was opened with another player. Since nobody else agrees with that interpretation, I am willing to drop it, but if hank flips scum later I will ROFL.

I want to stress that my case was based on something that jonty said, and that the fact that vodean was inactive was incidental to the case (although entirely part of why jonty said what he said).

Now, to the real meat of the question:

You want to target somebody who brings an inactive case (which was the smaller aspect of my case, I wouldn't honestly support a lynch on somebody for not confirming, you can check my meta for that). So, why not vote for the player who a)didn't notice the replacement and then started an inactive case or b) the player who blindly followed that case.

Spiesr, I don't want to pick on you, so:

Edoc: why are poor leaps of logic scummy, again?
rishaed: that's a double bandwagon on your part (me and then soundman)...

vote rishaed

Could you explain how I BW'd soundman??? I never voted him thus never hopped on the BW lol...

[DoomYoshi]

Easy to decipher spiesr.

Anyways, I generally agree with those situations. It wasn't a stab in the dark, I interpreted what jonty said as being unusual considering the timestamp on vodean's last visit. I interpreted this to mean only one thing - his pm was opened with another player. Since nobody else agrees with that interpretation, I am willing to drop it, but if hank flips scum later I will ROFL.

I want to stress that my case was based on something that jonty said, and that the fact that vodean was inactive was incidental to the case (although entirely part of why jonty said what he said).

Now, to the real meat of the question:

You want to target somebody who brings an inactive case (which was the smaller aspect of my case, I wouldn't honestly support a lynch on somebody for not confirming, you can check my meta for that). So, why not vote for the player who a)didn't notice the replacement and then started an inactive case or b) the player who blindly followed that case.

Spiesr, I don't want to pick on you, so:

Edoc: why are poor leaps of logic scummy, again?
rishaed: that's a double bandwagon on your part (me and then soundman)...

vote rishaed

Could you explain how I BW'd soundman??? I never voted him thus never hopped on the BW lol...

So you didn't, but you did "support" that wagon.

[rishaed]

Sure I support it but I don't feel that it is worth my vote, especially b/c it's D1 and I usually never strongly support a lynch D1. I just don't like mislyching ppl in this game. Maybe it'd look less scummy if I actually voted him, you are calling me scummy for BW'ing so it irrelevant at this point.

[soundman]

I'm here. Unvote Vote Rishaed. BWing is bad buddy. Especially when it's against me.

[Kanin Usagi]

Wow. I really don't like how Rishaed is acting. Giving "support" to a case, but not voting. Seems like a sneaky way of hoping a townie would get lynched and then being able to say "Well I didn't vote, therefore its not my fault." And then skimming so badly that you he didn't even notice a post that the mod made.

Vote Rishaed. <----- That's how you do it.

[Iron Butterfly]

Spiesr, at what point is it acceptable to advocate the lynch of an absentee player?

A straightforward question with few simple answers. This is going to depend significantly on the huge variety or situations that could come up in a mafia game. The most obvious example would be when there is enough "evidence" against said player that any replacement would have little hope of actually changing the result. (I don't feel what you had on Vodean was enough to qualify for this, even with the Day 1 allowance.) Another possibility is when finding a replacement is impossible for unlikely. (Clearly that wasn't the case this time.) Cases where a player is active enough to avoid replacement but still doesn't contribute anything could also fall under that logic. A third major category is when the game is so large and has so much inactivity that culling is necessary to make it playable again.
Beyond these general cases and laundry list of specific scenarios are sure to exist that could justify such an action. However, since they are mostly irrelevant to this game I won't try to list/come up with them, but rather just point out a little bit of why it bothered me this time. The justification you attached, arguing the Vodean had an above average chance of being scum, was, in my opinion, not that solid of reasoning. As such, to me, it felt like either going after and inactive for being inactive or just a shot in the dark. While neither of those are that terrible themselves, at least for Day 1, I felt that doing so against a player who would not respond would not result in the quality of discussion I would like to get out of this Day. The way I see it, if we had lynched Vodean without him being replaced or something and he came up town we would only have two potential ideas to work from tomorrow, barring night actions. Either go after someone who bandwagoned a little too carelessly, or go for the person who started the whole thing, you. Here's an idea we can just skip to that part right now. Anyhow, with this game being somewhat on the smaller side and the potentially dangerous setup, I am warry of anything that could us to mislynch two days in a row.
So, if you still feel attached to your idea about the pms with respect to Vodean, I encourage you to use it now while there is someone who can say something in defense, which I feel will give us better discussion than if had occurred without a replacement.
Well, good luck deciphering this rambling mess...

PLEASE,,please...please use paragraphs. The wall of text gives me a headache.

[Iron Butterfly]

As far as votes all I see is people second guessing each other with nothing substantial.

[rishaed]

For my Townie Defense I have this. . .

Just a quick thought when claiming we really should include the Game that it was from. It makes things easier to check, and town should have no problem doing so seeing as there's no reason to worry about fakeclaiming.

However I will leave my joke vote on Doom atm...
[url=http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=213&t=183503&start=30#p4022651]jokevote]
As much as I like being targeted by someone who has been around longer than I have, This IS completely obvious as a joke vote, and the SECOND vote in the game, maybe a few minutes after it started. Now you are misconstruing facts and saying it was a scummy BW. I think the scummy one is yourself mister Yoshi. Thus, not is sound partially active, but I have caught you misconstruing facts so that I will seem scummy. This is a case where I will support completely. UNVOTE VOTE DOOM! just so you can read that mister scum

[rishaed]

Oh just a few corrections I was the FIRST one to vote you. How dare you say I BW'd you, it would have better to call it as an OMGUS, which would also have been dumb, incorrect, and a twisting of facts. And I think you indirectly advocated a Speed Lynch on Vodean on faulty logic. I think you slipped, and were looking for an easy target. Too bad you chose the wrong one.

[gregwolf121]

sorry, for not posting but here i am, personally im not a strong supporter of any of the cases, mostly cause they lack supstance, and i support the furthering of discussion during this game, i have noticed a few small things but nothing strong yet, and nothing warranting mention, although some what unrelated its funny how often we call out others for faults we are showing,

also unvote