NOC Great Idea Mafia-Game Over! Mafia, vonFiedler, and More Cowbell win!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ace Emerald

Cyclic, lunar, metamorphosing
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I haven't seen Tesung or DLE post anything significant, while I can definitely sympathize with exam pain it'd be nice to see something out of that role. Neither has done anything super scummy, but the misunderstanding of the role of scum hunting doesn't sit super well with me. Wouldn't DLE know that scum hunting is necessary for the village when explaining NOC stuff? Vote Tesung

This whole "defensive/offensive" argument is largely subjective and easily misinterpreted. Even a careful examination of text can mean different things to different players, we largely fill in emotion in blank texts ourselves. While there are definite offensive/defensive rhetoric and we can use them to scum hunt, I think we might be over focusing on "omg that was so defensive." Taking a step back and evaluating the situation as a whole never hurts.
 
You guys are right, Empoof hasn't posted for a while. Prodding now.

Oh yeah, just to be clear, if you guys want somebody to be more active just tag them. PMing them is uncomfortably close to breaking NOC format.
 

Ampharos

tag walls, punch fascists
is a Community Contributor Alumnus
I dislike that Ace Emerald is trying to stifle discussion regarding the point of defensiveness, because it was actually a productive conversation, provided we can steer it in the right direction.

Let's return to the original question: were Felony and Celever defensive when responding to each other?

To answer this question, we'll need to define what we mean by "defensive" in the context of scumminess. This context is everything; in my opinion, it's possible to defend yourself without being "defensive."

Celever's post which was being questioned:

Celever said:
Jesus Christ guys this is an extremely fast bandwagon. Like some others have said, Obbmud's logic isn't actually that bad. I mean, Cancerous when he said that "if you have played mafia before you should now about the RVS" -- actually, I was playing in the Twilight Princess mafia which was also Obbmud's first game and there was no RVS in it. People just ganged up on LightWolf and tas iirc. But anyway, as that was also my first game, in the next NOC I played (Mario Kart, I believe?), what you are doing to Obbmud was very similar to what happened to me in that game. I.E, I had no clue what the RVS was thanks to there not being one in the beginner game, and then people thought I was acting dumb and playing up without checking and I got under fire. Thankfully I survived the onslaught of Spiffy and co. (Spiffy sux btw) but it was actually the mafias who were pressuring me the hardest. Because, imo, there are quite a few connections between what happened to me when I was village in Mario kart and what is happening now with Obbmud, I'm going to Unlynch Obbmud (I didn't think I had him voted, but I do in the vote count. Whatever :p) for now.

I'm not getting huge vibes from anyone else, but Cancerous aimlessly bandwagoned on both Ullar and Obbmud, and he was spouting information without backing it up. I would lynch Cancerous right now, but he is the Town Innocent Child. Cancerous, as the Inno Child you must check your info. You are essential to the village so please put lots of thought into your posts and check over things. A little bit later on people might start relying on you (personally I don't like becoming entirely reliant on anyone, but still) so you honestly have lots of bargaining power. Please use it wisely.

In the meantime, however, I will Lynch Da Letter El because not only is he inactive like B_T said, he also jumped the gun with Ullar. While this is fairly minor and was obviously a troll post, it still can be noted that he really created a freshly made wagon which I usually consider a scumtell. And then he kind of died and hasn't posted since.
In my opinion, this is a good post. He explains his reasoning for others to see, and the amount of explanation also will provide us with ample information should one of them die (note: if Celever or Obbmud winds up being scum, examine the other closely). I don't see any way in which this post is defensive, though his lynch on DLE was probably a bit of an overreaction.

Felony's response:

Felony said:
Why are you getting so defensive? You are very cagey and defensive just because you are trying to look like you are participating and calling out others that are not doing so. Instead of explaining how Obbmud's logic wasn't bad, you just simply drop it instead of digging deeper. Rather than going "I like B_T; what he said, lynch DLL", you went on a very detailed explanation as to why B_T was correct, one totally unneeded/unwarranted by the circumstances. Next, the case boils down to "this person jokevoted and then disappeared for 36 hours"; seeing someone show up on "Who's Online" and not posting in the thread is not generally considered grounds for a lynch in my opinion. That's a pretty weak case. Good enough for D1, I guess, but not one you spend an entire paragraph *of someone else's words* on. Finally, B_T's vote on DLL was timed and scoped specifically for pressure. While it's developed into a serious vote, that's not why it was originally made, so for you to pass it off as a serious vote is dumb. You voted DLL for what? You borrowed what you thought was B_T "serious" lynch to do so instead of coming up with your own.
The logic in this post is pretty terrible. Felony suggested that Celever bandwagon without reasoning, and condemned him for actually explaining things. Yes, it was an overreaction, but in NOC I've found it's better to overstate than understate. And then in your paragraph he mentions himself that the post was "good enough for D1." If that's the case, then there should be no problem here, right? Yet you feel the need to attack him anyways. The last person I played mafia with who was this intentionally antagonistic and abrasive was Metal Sonic, and you know what? He was mafia. My conclusion? While not exactly a defensive post, it certainly was a scummy one.

Let's take a look at some of Felony's other responses.

Felony said:
How am I being defensive? Can you give an example? Second, someone who doesn't take accusations seriously just looks scummy to me. Your post caught my attention because I didn't see the intent to scum hunt from you, just to post without putting up info for us to go on. If DLL was the next best target to you, why spend your whole post saying exactly what B_T mentioned? Also, nice job twisting my words. I said while it has developed into a serious lynch, that was not the original point of the vote, and that it was dumb for you to pass it off as one. I never called Walrein's posts weird, I said they had a lack of quality from an experienced player, and when I made that post, it was true. On to what you said about Memoric, no he shouldn't hide who he thinks is mafia. Players giving their thoughts on who they think is scum is almost never a bad idea and this is still day 1 if you forgot. Any information is helpful and he has absolutely no reason to be keeping it secret.
This is seriously one of the most hypocritical and contradictory paragraphs I've ever seen. Let's examine a few contradictions:

"How am I being defensive?" -> "Also, nice job twisting my words." This is, in fact, a defensive statement.
"I never called Walrein's posts weird..." Uh, dude.
Felony said:
Walrein is playing weird right now.
"Players giving their thoughts on who they think is scum is almost never a bad idea..." So, the thing you're attacking Celever for doing is never a bad idea?

One possible explanation for this? It's like the final opponent in Ace Attorney Dual Destinies; his emotions aren't real, so he contradicts himself all over the place trying to fake them.

Felony said:
My top two scum reads at the moment are UllarWarlord and Celever. Ullar is just using the fact that he is new to NOC as an excuse for a lack of clarifications on his posts and lynch votes.
So you're accusing Ullar and Celever of being mafia; one for overexplaining, the other for underexplaining. I think I've heard enough. starwarsfan is no longer my prime scumread.

Unvote
Lynch Felony
 
Day 1, Vote Count 7(Majority is 8 votes)

Ace Emerald (0):
Blue_Tornado (0): Obbmud99
Cancerous (0):
Celever (0): LightWolf
Empoof (2): Celever starwarsfan Cancerous
Felony (5): Memoric More Cowbell Celever Blue_Tornado Tesung LightWolf Walrein L-3
LightWolf (1): Empoof
Memoric (0): Ace Emerald
More Cowbell (0): Obbmud99
Obbmud99 (2): More Cowbell Celever Walrein starwarsfan LightWolf Memoric
Paperblade (0): Walrein starwarsfan
starwarsfan (2): Obbmud99 Walrein UllarWarlord Obbmud99 Walrein Paperblade UllarWarlord
Da Letter El Tesung (2): Felony Blue_Tornado Celever (votes cleared by substitute) Obbmud99 Ace Emerald
UllarWarlord (1): UllarWarlord Ace Emerald Da Letter El Cancerous starwarsfan More Cowbell
Walrein (0): Paperblade Blue_Tornado Tesung

Not Voting: Felony

Host Mistake Tally since most recent Deadline Review: 0
Overall: 1

Next Vote Count: 4:00 PM EDT (GMT-4) on May 2nd (24 hours away).
Deadline: 4:00 PM EDT (GMT-4) on May 2nd (24 hours away).

There are a few players who haven't posted since last vote count-prod notices are coming up once I figure out exactly who.
 
Last edited:

Ace Emerald

Cyclic, lunar, metamorphosing
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Walrein I clarified that I value defensiveness evaluation as a tool, but it seems to be 100% monopolizing the conversation. I don't know where you're pulling "stifling conversation" from, I just wanted to talk a little about logical inconsistencies because other people (like yourself) are covering most of the points for the defensiveness scum hunt. Just trying to help ^_^
 
I dislike that Ace Emerald is trying to stifle discussion regarding the point of defensiveness, because it was actually a productive conversation, provided we can steer it in the right direction.

Let's return to the original question: were Felony and Celever defensive when responding to each other?

To answer this question, we'll need to define what we mean by "defensive" in the context of scumminess. This context is everything; in my opinion, it's possible to defend yourself without being "defensive."

Celever's post which was being questioned:



In my opinion, this is a good post. He explains his reasoning for others to see, and the amount of explanation also will provide us with ample information should one of them die (note: if Celever or Obbmud winds up being scum, examine the other closely). I don't see any way in which this post is defensive, though his lynch on DLE was probably a bit of an overreaction.

Felony's response:



The logic in this post is pretty terrible. Felony suggested that Celever bandwagon without reasoning, and condemned him for actually explaining things. Yes, it was an overreaction, but in NOC I've found it's better to overstate than understate. And then in your paragraph he mentions himself that the post was "good enough for D1." If that's the case, then there should be no problem here, right? Yet you feel the need to attack him anyways. The last person I played mafia with who was this intentionally antagonistic and abrasive was Metal Sonic, and you know what? He was mafia. My conclusion? While not exactly a defensive post, it certainly was a scummy one.

Let's take a look at some of Felony's other responses.



This is seriously one of the most hypocritical and contradictory paragraphs I've ever seen. Let's examine a few contradictions:

"How am I being defensive?" -> "Also, nice job twisting my words." This is, in fact, a defensive statement.
"I never called Walrein's posts weird..." Uh, dude.

"Players giving their thoughts on who they think is scum is almost never a bad idea..." So, the thing you're attacking Celever for doing is never a bad idea?

One possible explanation for this? It's like the final opponent in Ace Attorney Dual Destinies; his emotions aren't real, so he contradicts himself all over the place trying to fake them.



So you're accusing Ullar and Celever of being mafia; one for overexplaining, the other for underexplaining. I think I've heard enough. starwarsfan is no longer my prime scumread.

Unvote
Lynch Felony
If Celever built a case / had a reason to lynch DLL that was different from the one stated by B_T, then there would be no problem. I wasn't suggesting that he bandwagon, I was saying that he should have established a case different from B_T. He also wasn't condemned for explaining things, he was rebuked for explaining things and basically reiterating things already expressed by B_T's post. I'm attacking him so he doesn't take pressure votes and turn them into "serious" lynches for no reason, something you clearly missed.

"The last person I played mafia with who was this intentionally antagonistic and abrasive was Metal Sonic, and you know what? He was mafia. My conclusion? While not exactly a defensive post, it certainly was a scummy one." -- This is using a meta case but applying it universally, when a meta case is only useful on a person by person basis. It is the definition of if a is b and b's are c's then all a's must be c's. That's not scum hunting logic, that's bad logic.
 
As of now I think I'd rather vote Felony or Tesung than Ullar, but I don't want to put Felony at L-2 just yet (too close to a lynch IMO, mafia may be able to profit from that, and there's always the possibility that Felony turns out to be the Parolee (lynched with one vote less than majority)). So:

Unvote
Vote Tesung

DLE and Tesung aren't the same person, but they do have the same role, and I'm unimpressed by both of them. Tesung especially is leaving very little posts, and the things that he does post are quite useless.

Also, ss, I think you made some mistakes in the vote count again; the votes of Obbmud and Ace Emerald on Tesung are not counted (unless one is a negative voter, but that role doesn't appear in the possible role list), and my former vote on Ullar is counted double, while I'm not a mayor.
 
Also, I will be on a holiday for the next couple of days, but the place I'll be staying at is supposed to have internet, so I will be able to keep posting. If I'm nowhere to be found, that would be it, but I don't expect to disappear.
 
I don't exactly know what you want me to say. I have no idea how I or any of you are supposed to be able to tell who is mafia when there is literally no evidence. What you guys call "quality posts" are just people going through some one else's post and nitpicking any little contradiction or if they misspoke, and saying that makes them suspicious. I can make one of those posts if you want me to but I don't see how it is constructive at all.
 

Ullar

card-carrying wife-guy
is a Smogon Discord Contributor
To be fair, that's not quite how it works. What people are trying to determine is if others are trying to subtly undermine the village through bad play. By pointing out such contradictions, people can determine, with varying degrees of success, how 'scummy' a person can be.
 
spiresquire has subbed in for Empoof, effective immediately.

If you know anybody who might be interested in subbing later on in the game, have them PM me! I'm looking for more people to fill space in case inactivity gets worse.
 
That's perfectly fine with me. The guy didn't exactly give me much to work with, I'll say, but at the same time, I could've said no. Really wanted to know what he was going to post, though.. :/

As for the "something substantial" part, I'm going to have to go back over the game and actually think a little bit before giving out my opinon. I don't want to just echo what everyone else has been spitting out all game, but I also don't want to jump to conclusions. Until then, feel free to keep the votes on me.

Also since this is my first NOC (and my second mafia game overall) I need to make sure I'm on the same page with people. Don't want to derail the conversation too much, so I'll ask that the answer to these questions are brief.

  1. The point of RVS isn't to actually lynch someone quickly, but to get a reaction out of them from the pressure, yes or no?
  2. The second point of Day 1 is to look back on it to find connections and piece together intentions once kills and lynches have bern revealed, yes or no?
  3. Day 1 is typically longer than most days due to a lack of a deadline, yes or no?
  4. Empoof does this whole lurking thing often, yes or no?
Greatly appreciated if I could get some quick confirmations of these questions, thanks in advance. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)

Top