Rolegift Mafia, All Present

[Skoffin]

If the plan works perfectly then it means it's pointless for the mafia to even try, and makes it pointless for me to play.

Now it could be poor wording and is said in the spirit of challenge but... It feels weird for Skoff to not have noticed this could be misinterpreted, so it makes me think she was really starting to worry about these "plans". Or is very empathic towards mafia's chances. Either way Vote Skoffypop

I expected to be jumped on by average scum or noobs, I did not expect to get it from a veteran. Yes, I'm 'worried about these plans', but it has nothing to do with my alignment. No matter my alignment I do believe that each side should have a fair chance of winning, and I don't think anyone should be looking for loopholes for their team. I believe it goes against the spirit of the game and I find that far more important then winning a game. If by chance everyone chooses to do this plan then I would loudly refuse to comply, and if that gets me lynched then so be it. I've been in games where the players have gone 'up/down a list' and it sucks all the fun out of even playing.

[/]

gosh, for two continuous pages there was no mention of the word "vote", is that close to a record? if not, you people are boring, what happened to day one bandwagons for no reason at all?

Vote count

Commander9; 1 vote: Campin_Killer
Fircoal; 1 vote: karelpietertje
karelpietertje; 1 vote: Haggis_McMutton
Skoffin; 3 vote: spiesr, naxus, ga7
safari; 2 votes: aage, Mr. Squirrel
Campin_Killer; 1 vote: safariguy5

It takes 8 to lynch, 1 bored mod to gamble with your lives, deadline Tuesday!

[karelpietertje]

I think people are hesitant to vote because it is so easy for the mafia to blend in with all the confusion about the rules.

However, especially with a deadline, I feel like skoffins mafia-confession is a good lead. If we take the wording seriously, it definitely has to do with alignment.
Also, in the couple of games I've played now, I've never seen the 'I don't care if I get lynched'-card by a townie until after a majority of votes had been reached, and it's hard to believe that it could be said by someone who wants town to win, i.e. a motivated townie.

Since you apparently are not a motivated townie;
unvote, vote skoffin

[naxus]

gosh, for two continuous pages there was no mention of the word "vote", is that close to a record? if not, you people are boring, what happened to day one bandwagons for no reason at all?

Vote count

Commander9; 2 votes: naxus, Campin_Killer
Fircoal; 1 vote: karelpietertje
karelpietertje; 1 vote: Haggis_McMutton
Skoffin; 3 vote: spiesr, naxus, ga7
safari; 2 votes: aage, Mr. Squirrel
Campin_Killer; 1 vote: safariguy5

It takes 8 to lynch, 1 bored mod to gamble with your lives, deadline Tuesday!

I voted for skoff on page 5....

[Skoffin]

I think people are hesitant to vote because it is so easy for the mafia to blend in with all the confusion about the rules.

However, especially with a deadline, I feel like skoffins mafia-confession is a good lead. If we take the wording seriously, it definitely has to do with alignment.
Also, in the couple of games I've played now, I've never seen the 'I don't care if I get lynched'-card by a townie until after a majority of votes had been reached, and it's hard to believe that it could be said by someone who wants town to win, i.e. a motivated townie.

Since you apparently are not a motivated townie;
unvote, vote skoffin

I can't tell whether you have simply misread me or are wilfully misrepresenting what I've stated and I think it's quite a leap to call it a mafia confession. It is NOT a case of 'I don't care if I get lynched', period. It's a case of I'd rather be lynched for refusing to break a game then to be part of breaking a game. I'm not the least bit eager to get myself lynched and that is not what I wrote.
Since apparently it needs to be, I'll break down the quote that ga7 referenced.

If the plan works perfectly then it means it's pointless for the mafia to even try, and makes it pointless for me to play.

What you have seemed to take from this is "This plan would ruin the game for mafia, as mafia this game would be ruined for me". When what I actually meant was essentially "This would make the game impossible for the mafia, so would should I even bother to scumhunt if I will auto-win anyway?"

[karelpietertje]

I expected to be jumped on by average scum or noobs, I did not expect to get it from a veteran. Yes, I'm 'worried about these plans', but it has nothing to do with my alignment. No matter my alignment I do believe that each side should have a fair chance of winning, and I don't think anyone should be looking for loopholes for their team. I believe it goes against the spirit of the game and I find that far more important then winning a game. If by chance everyone chooses to do this plan then I would loudly refuse to comply, and if that gets me lynched then so be it. I've been in games where the players have gone 'up/down a list' and it sucks all the fun out of even playing.

[karelpietertje]

that's the part where you play the 'i don't care about being lynched'-card

[Mr. Squirrel]

And so now a desperation bandwagon starts. vote ga7 for starting such a ridiculous wagon. Although its more likely that the scum are the people who jumped on the wagon so... FOS everyone else on it.

He wants us to play mafia like mafia is supposed to be played and you all are jumping on him for it!? Serioiusly?

[kwanton]

So that's lynch -3 on skoff?

I don't think skoff really did anything scummy. This looks more like a misinterpretation of what she said. Then again, I can see the point where a strategy that would break the game in favor of town could cause mafia to get frustrated and slip up which is what I see the main argument against skoff as. The deadline isn't until tuesday, however I think we can afford to hold off until we find a better lead. I'm with-holding my vote for now.

[Skoffin]

I expected to be jumped on by average scum or noobs, I did not expect to get it from a veteran. Yes, I'm 'worried about these plans', but it has nothing to do with my alignment. No matter my alignment I do believe that each side should have a fair chance of winning, and I don't think anyone should be looking for loopholes for their team. I believe it goes against the spirit of the game and I find that far more important then winning a game. If by chance everyone chooses to do this plan then I would loudly refuse to comply, and if that gets me lynched then so be it. I've been in games where the players have gone 'up/down a list' and it sucks all the fun out of even playing.

It is NOT a case of 'I don't care if I get lynched', period. It's a case of I'd rather be lynched for refusing to break a game then to be part of breaking a game. I'm not the least bit eager to get myself lynched and that is not what I wrote.

Odd, I could swear that these bits seem to match each other... you have just quoted me saying that I'd be okay with being lynched only if THIS PLAN goes through and I refuse to go along with it. So... what exactly is your point?

For the record, on other sites and on this very forum, I've done similar to this and got lynched for it - on this forum I even happened to be a townie. Believe it or not, some people are willing to put their necks on the line for the sake of the spirit of the game. I admit I'm not a great player and that I have done some things that upon later reflection were rather questionable, however I will not wilfully do anything that undermines the game itself.

[ga7]

Lol, I was totally fishing too as I pretty much knew what Skoff would answer Yes it is a ridiculous wagon, the only bad thing is that Karel voted for a slightly different argument which makes slightly more sense than the one I gave, so I dunno if he misunderstood SKoff's intent or just made a clever wagon vote as scum. I agree with / there's not enough voting though so might as well...
Unvote Vote Karel

ps: I just decided Skoffin would thus be typed SKoffin as it goes better with her scum nature
pps: SKoffin is probably scum anyway but even I don't believe it was a slip up so gotta catch her on something else

[aage]

So that's lynch -3 on skoff?

Actually it's -4. Naxus' comment is pretty worthless since his vote actually was on there...

vote naxus the scumariner

[aage]

So that's lynch -3 on skoff?

Actually it's -4. Naxus' comment is pretty worthless since his vote actually was on there...

vote naxus the scumariner

ebwop unvote vote naxus the scumariner

[karelpietertje]

Skoffin, I perfectly understand the 'if, then' in "If by chance everyone chooses to do this plan then I would loudly refuse to comply, and if that gets me lynched then so be it."

This is not about putting your life in lower priority than the spirit of the game, I assume everybody plays for fun rather than winning. I too believe that a massclaim day 1 or 2 is not what we want to do, since we should be able to trust the mod that it is a balanced games without such measures.

However, the sentence I quoted effectively means: "If a wants to lynch me, then I don't agree, and if not agreeing will get me lynched then so be it."
essentially, this means nothing. Only a lyncher would agree to himself being lynched, and thus a 'so be it' from the lynched person equals zero.

The only thing a person to be lynched can do about the lynch is claim. While I realize the only claiming in this game that can be done so far is saying if and who you gave your gift to, your statement is generally used by scum to try to justify why they won't claim. This is the reason I voted for you, even though I wish there was somebody with more reason to vote for.

@ga7: I don't understand how you switch your vote from skoffin to me in the same post you say that my reason for voting skoffin makes more sense than your own ?

[Haggis_McMutton]

This is indeed a most ridiculous wagon. I think odds are good that there's scum on it, especially this close to the deadline.

However, especially with a deadline, I feel like skoffins mafia-confession is a good lead. If we take the wording seriously, it definitely has to do with alignment.
Also, in the couple of games I've played now, I've never seen the 'I don't care if I get lynched'-card by a townie until after a majority of votes had been reached, and it's hard to believe that it could be said by someone who wants town to win, i.e. a motivated townie.

Since you apparently are not a motivated townie;
unvote, vote skoffin

Skoffin, I perfectly understand the 'if, then' in "If by chance everyone chooses to do this plan then I would loudly refuse to comply, and if that gets me lynched then so be it."

This is not about putting your life in lower priority than the spirit of the game, I assume everybody plays for fun rather than winning. I too believe that a massclaim day 1 or 2 is not what we want to do, since we should be able to trust the mod that it is a balanced games without such measures.

However, the sentence I quoted effectively means: "If a wants to lynch me, then I don't agree, and if not agreeing will get me lynched then so be it."
essentially, this means nothing. Only a lyncher would agree to himself being lynched, and thus a 'so be it' from the lynched person equals zero.

The only thing a person to be lynched can do about the lynch is claim. While I realize the only claiming in this game that can be done so far is saying if and who you gave your gift to, your statement is generally used by scum to try to justify why they won't claim. This is the reason I voted for you, even though I wish there was somebody with more reason to vote for.

@ga7: I don't understand how you switch your vote from skoffin to me in the same post you say that my reason for voting skoffin makes more sense than your own ?

These posts don't make much sense to me.

"Mafia confession?" where?
"I don't care if I get lynched?" she didn't say that at all.
And that quote. She is clearly stating that she will refuse to comply with the plan even if it gets her lynched. Where do you get the not agreeing with her being lynched? She's not agreeing with the plan.

Also, and most importantly, why would a scum make all that fuss. What exactly does a scum have to lose by saying who he sent his present to?

Dunno, seems like you're trying to find excuses to jump on the biggest wagon to me.
Not very strong evidence, but I'm gonna go with my gut and vote karelp

[naxus]

So that's lynch -3 on skoff?

Actually it's -4. Naxus' comment is pretty worthless since his vote actually was on there...

vote naxus the scumariner

ebwop unvote vote naxus the scumariner

not scumarining just misread the vote count

Karel seems to be pushing skoff a little hard but with the way were set up, scum tells leading to pressure would lead to a claim but thats out the window so whatever.

Skoff still seems to be overreacting a bit but thats just me

[karelpietertje]

@Haggis: To answer your (good) questions: mafia-confession refers to: "If the plan works perfectly then it means it's pointless for the mafia to even try, and makes it pointless for me to play.". It was rather a quick name for the case than trying to make skoffin look scummy.
I interpreted "So be it" as not caring about the if part of that sentence.

Scum won't lose much by not giving away info, but we have a long way (at least 2 or 3 game-days) ahead of us figuring out our own and others' presents, and scum will definitely try to spread a lot of confusion in this.

Look, I realize my case on skoffin isn't strong, it just seemed at the strongest lead to me. At the rate this game was progressing at, I decided to place my vote on her 5-6 days before deadline and explain my thoughts. I guess your vote on me is comparable to it, so I understand, but I really only mean to lynch scum.

[safariguy5]

I think karelp is at least singling out skoffin as a target. If we're really supposed to play "how mafia is normally played" then we're basically looking for suspicious posts on day 1. I think the statement skoffin made is overly dramatic, but I don't like how haggis is now jumping on karelp. It looks to me like he's trying to muddy the waters and force a no lynch. OMGUS by proxy if you will. I'm willing to follow karelp on this.

unvote vote skoffin

[Commander9]

I'll re-read this sometime this weekend and post something useful.

[Haggis_McMutton]

@Haggis: To answer your (good) questions: mafia-confession refers to: "If the plan works perfectly then it means it's pointless for the mafia to even try, and makes it pointless for me to play.". It was rather a quick name for the case than trying to make skoffin look scummy.
I interpreted "So be it" as not caring about the if part of that sentence.

All right. But as she said herself, it didn't mean she doesn't care. It means she's willing to be lynched for her "principles".

Scum won't lose much by not giving away info, but we have a long way (at least 2 or 3 game-days) ahead of us figuring out our own and others' presents, and scum will definitely try to spread a lot of confusion in this.

Really don't see why.
If we have a mass claim situation I believe scum will just tell the truth like everyone else and try to look townie-like as to maybe get presents. No real reason to take risks by lieing and absolutely no reason to make a big fuss about how they won't reveal their actions.

Look, I realize my case on skoffin isn't strong, it just seemed at the strongest lead to me. At the rate this game was progressing at, I decided to place my vote on her 5-6 days before deadline and explain my thoughts. I guess your vote on me is comparable to it, so I understand, but I really only mean to lynch scum.

The thing is. I don't see a case on Skoffin. She claimed she thinks a mass claim is against the spirit of the game and that she would rather be lynched than participate in that(Commander did a similar thing in the Rudolph game, though eventually he did claim). You say it's a ploy so she, as scum, doesn't have to claim. But there's no reason for scum not to say who they sent their presents to. They just need to keep their heads down and make sure people are killed, which it seems to me you are doing.

I think karelp is at least singling out skoffin as a target. If we're really supposed to play "how mafia is normally played" then we're basically looking for suspicious posts on day 1. I think the statement skoffin made is overly dramatic, but I don't like how haggis is now jumping on karelp. It looks to me like he's trying to muddy the waters and force a no lynch. OMGUS by proxy if you will. I'm willing to follow karelp on this.

unvote vote skoffin

So karelp is "singling out a target", but I'm "jumping on karelp"
Also, OMGUS?

My case is: karelp is using either very bad logic and/or a misunderstanding of Skoffin's statement to push for her lynch.
Karel's case: She said she'd rather die than claim in a game where claiming carries no real downside for scum

[Mr. Squirrel]

Lol, I was totally fishing too as I pretty much knew what Skoff would answer Yes it is a ridiculous wagon, the only bad thing is that Karel voted for a slightly different argument which makes slightly more sense than the one I gave, so I dunno if he misunderstood SKoff's intent or just made a clever wagon vote as scum. I agree with / there's not enough voting though so might as well...
Unvote Vote Karel

I don't know if you are serious or just trying to play off that your accusation was just fishing. Either way, unvote. I'll trust you for now.

Karel on the other hand is sticking to this retarded bw anyway. vote karel It really seems like you wanna press for a bad lynch here.

[Skoffin]

Karel: I don't think you are understanding what I meant. I am willing to do anything it takes to not be killed but there is a point where that takes a backseat. One of those points being if I I must choose between doing something I consider game breaking, or choosing to not do that game breaking thing and risk being killed for it. That quote you keep using was both to state how we should not do that plan and to highlight just how seriously I am against it. We're not even doing the plan. Frankly I think this has just been a whole lot of hoopla over nothing.

Also, there seems to have been a mixup so I'd like to clarify. This is not about a mass claim. Although I do think that massclaims are borderline (and stupid for games in their early stages) my comments were not about that, they were about the notion of instructing everyone in the game to 'pick the person above/below you'. Such notions essentially instruct people to not scumhunt or figure out who most likely is town for instead you'd just get everyones actions and then pick kills based on the replies. I'd be against this no matter what role or setup it's done in. As I've said, I've been in games where this has been done and it completely killed the point and fun of the game. That is what my issue is with, but we're not even doing that and we've been discussing this far longer then it needed to be.

Skoff still seems to be overreacting a bit but thats just me

Which part is the over reaction?

[karelpietertje]

Meh... I still feel like skoffin is a good candidate to lynch. not having said anything (except for the INJECT PRESENTS INTO MY VEINS thing, hehe) until page 9
also little incongruencies like 'i expected to be jumped on by noob scum, not by a veteran like you ga7' when there wasn't any reason (besides having annoyed naxus by typing in red) to be voted for. Did you already see before ga7 pointed it out that your statement could be interpreted like that, were you wearing really nice perfume, or did you have other reason to expect to be jumped on?

Anyway, I guess that the 'a massclaim gives mafia no chance so it's not fun for me' was really just a clumsy way of saying you wanted to hunt down scum the classic way.

[Skoffin]

I was not the only person not commenting during the period, but I believe I hadn't even been on the forum between those two posts. It seems I failed to note it in this particular thread, but I have mentioned in other games that my internet has become a problem rendering it difficult to get on here a times.
I did anticipate a potential of newbies and/or scum jumping on me, while feeling that older players likely would get my meaning. I did not feel that ga7 would and thus my surprise, but he has since claimed otherwise anyhow.

Again, this was never about a massclaim.
Anyway, if you are going to use things I have said I would prefer you to quote things I have actually written. While the first comment in red accurately paraphrases something I wrote, the second one does not. (The 'a massclaim gives mafia no chance so it's not fun for me' one) That is not something I wrote, that is how you interpreted something I wrote. To put it out in a way that looks like a quotation is misleading.

[safariguy5]

@Haggis: To answer your (good) questions: mafia-confession refers to: "If the plan works perfectly then it means it's pointless for the mafia to even try, and makes it pointless for me to play.". It was rather a quick name for the case than trying to make skoffin look scummy.
I interpreted "So be it" as not caring about the if part of that sentence.

All right. But as she said herself, it didn't mean she doesn't care. It means she's willing to be lynched for her "principles".

Scum won't lose much by not giving away info, but we have a long way (at least 2 or 3 game-days) ahead of us figuring out our own and others' presents, and scum will definitely try to spread a lot of confusion in this.

Really don't see why.
If we have a mass claim situation I believe scum will just tell the truth like everyone else and try to look townie-like as to maybe get presents. No real reason to take risks by lieing and absolutely no reason to make a big fuss about how they won't reveal their actions.

Look, I realize my case on skoffin isn't strong, it just seemed at the strongest lead to me. At the rate this game was progressing at, I decided to place my vote on her 5-6 days before deadline and explain my thoughts. I guess your vote on me is comparable to it, so I understand, but I really only mean to lynch scum.

The thing is. I don't see a case on Skoffin. She claimed she thinks a mass claim is against the spirit of the game and that she would rather be lynched than participate in that(Commander did a similar thing in the Rudolph game, though eventually he did claim). You say it's a ploy so she, as scum, doesn't have to claim. But there's no reason for scum not to say who they sent their presents to. They just need to keep their heads down and make sure people are killed, which it seems to me you are doing.

I think karelp is at least singling out skoffin as a target. If we're really supposed to play "how mafia is normally played" then we're basically looking for suspicious posts on day 1. I think the statement skoffin made is overly dramatic, but I don't like how haggis is now jumping on karelp. It looks to me like he's trying to muddy the waters and force a no lynch. OMGUS by proxy if you will. I'm willing to follow karelp on this.

unvote vote skoffin

So karelp is "singling out a target", but I'm "jumping on karelp"
Also, OMGUS?

My case is: karelp is using either very bad logic and/or a misunderstanding of Skoffin's statement to push for her lynch.
Karel's case: She said she'd rather die than claim in a game where claiming carries no real downside for scum

Ultimately, neither of these cases is particularly compelling one way or the other. But if we want to get to a lynch, it usually ends up as a nitpicky sort of reason during Day 1. Add in the smokescreen of not knowing your role this early, and it's very difficult to find reasons not to end up semi-randomly lynching someone.