REVIVAL OF MAFIA: Game Thread (DAY 2)

[BT]

I still think the original vote was half-decent for the point in time that I made it. Both of you are just going "I was trying to end RVS!" at eachother, and I mean, sure, that defense does sort of work, but you two are still the most compelling thing happening all day so I'm sticking with it and the way the situation is developing is not changing my mind. Dormio's the only other person with a notable post and I actually agree with the whole thing, so.

In response to BT yeah I am :dwi: I think Raikaria voting him for it is fine and Schezo's continued case is that Raikaria's response is not fine and is scummy reaching, which I disagree with. I'm p.fine with my vote on Schezo staying where it is.

Hmm. I can't see how you think that first vote was decent after his explanation in #44. Before just now you were talking about RVS stuff instead of Schezo's response. I'm a little shifty-eyes you append your case after Dormio did the work for you.

[Serela]

So I'm supposed to think that Raikaria being under the impression a player's name was L when the signups list called him L, is reasonable to argue as him adding scummy obfuscation into his posts??

Now that's what I call a stretch. :I

No, I don't think there was anything wrong with me voting Schezo over it.

Part of Schezo's defense was that he avoided answering for the sake of helping end RVS (And then Raikaria talked about ending rvs with his stuff too turning it into a whole thing), and avoiding answering was a good part of the initial reason I voted him, so yes, I talked about that.

[BT]

So I'm supposed to think that Raikaria being under the impression a player's name was L when the signups list called him L, is reasonable to argue as him adding scummy obfuscation into his posts??

Now that's what I call a stretch. :I

No, I don't think there was anything wrong with me voting Schezo over it.

Part of Schezo's defense was that he avoided answering for the sake of helping end RVS (And then Raikaria talked about ending rvs with his stuff too turning it into a whole thing), and avoiding answering was a good part of the initial reason I voted him, so yes, I talked about that.

Here's my lens: Schezo sees a wordy Rai post and points it out. It's not a solid argument, but I can see someone arguing that. On the other hand, you're voting him for the argument and for avoiding the dumb question, which are total duds to me.

If I'd vote Schezo, it's for accepting the way you presented his post in the first place, and for constantly inserting those "I admit it, you're right about ___" lines, which bug me for some reason. None of the things you're voting him on.

[Schezo]

Ding Ding Ding,

I actually did stuff that was scumtastic and instead of getting jumped on for that (Dormio), which would be a genuine case from town, I get jumped on to get jumped on (Serela.)

Rev up the wagon.

[Raikaria]

You know my most recent post before this one was made 5 mins before I left for work and I completely missed the relevance that Ace Attorney Mafia had.

I realized it after walking for about 10 mins and came here ready to smash apart Schezo's case on me because of the number of logical hoops he's using to connect me calling DaLetterEl merely 'L' to me being scum.

About 5 mins after that I decided that maybe even if Schezo's logic was bad at least he's attempting to scumhunt just like I'm attempting to so maybe I shouldn't get on his case anymore than needed to see how other people react.

Then I come back and read the thread and I'm almost dissapointed that I don't get to talk about me roleplaying Damon Gant and giving everyone nicknames in character in an anon game where I happened to be scum. Because surprise surprise; things happened.

And while I can see Schezo's logic in the Serena case; I think there is something even worse.

What's worse than jumping on someone to be jumped on as Schezo claims instead of jumping on someone for being 'scumtastic'?

Jumping on the case that is being made by someone being scumtastic. That's what.

##Save: Bardiche
##Kill: Raikaria

Srsvote

By Schezo's own admission he was being 'scumtastic' and PX just jumps on it without even explaining. It's worse to jump on a case that's obviously scumtastic than to jump on someone being scumtastic in my books.

I think that's a stronger thing to chase up than Serela. Although I'll be honest, but this just be personal bias from the fact that Serela was defending me. I also just got home from work and I want read over it a few times and wait a little just to see how Serela responds to this development before I make a proper judgement on it.

##Vote: PX

I could change this if I re-read and see something in Serela's posts that seems fishy, but I think PX has at least as much explaining to do as Serela.

Also glad to see we're not following MotK town meta of two townies slap each other silly trying to break RVS D1 and one of them gets lynched.

[Raikaria]

I typo'ed Serela as Serena a few times.

What is this.

[Raikaria]

Yeah re-reading I'll say I basically agree with the points on Serela but I don't want to hop on the wagon just yet and think we need to chase up PX as well here.

Rev up the wagon; but don't all jump on it quite yet.

Because hopping on a scummy wagon for no explained reason is suspect. BT gave a reason and his vote wasn't jumping on a case. And of course DaLetterEl hadn't posted since RVS.

Although to be completely fair to PX because of his complete lack of an explanation he could have been agreeing with BT not Schezo. But still; he was putting me at L-2 for no explained reason that early in D1.

[Conqueror]

Honestly, I don't think PX's vote was unreasonable at the time he made it even if he gave zero reasoning. I wouldn't be adverse to a wagon but I'm mostly neutral and feel there could be (?) better lurker targets. Like if I had a vig I'd shoot DaLetterEl on suspicion of tactical lurking. FPMH.

I agree that Schezo's logic progression in the last few pages has been a little janky but I don't think it's janky in a scummy way, reminds me of what happened in Ten Desires Mafia.

When the game just isn't progressing otherwise we have to pretend someone actually looks guilty for something that's excused by RVS. If I give both of you a pass for that I'm nearly back to RVS and that would be awful. :I

Part of Schezo's defense was that he avoided answering for the sake of helping end RVS
...
avoiding answering was a good part of the initial reason I voted him, so yes, I talked about that.

Okay...sure, in RVS you can trump up reasons to vote for people because that's how you get the game started. From what I got from your posts you agree Schezo could have been doing that. What I keep getting from you is that "I'm justified voting Schezo" and less "Schezo is scummy." Sure. We have about a day left and it's safe to say RVS is over. So why do you think Schezo is scum? Are you scum Serela?  :ohdear:

[Conqueror]

Also glad to see we're not following MotK town meta of two townies slap each other silly trying to break RVS D1 and one of them gets lynched.

Does that mean you think Schezo is town now?

[Raikaria]

Does that mean you think Schezo is town now?

Correct; also alluded to by me posting 'wait a second maybe Schezo is just doing the same thing I'm doing' realization as I was walking.

I merely think PX should explain his vote. Schezo by his own admission was being scummy when pushing on me. PX jumped on that wagon without any explanation.

[Raikaria]

Correct; also alluded to by me posting 'wait a second maybe Schezo is just doing the same thing I'm doing' realization as I was walking.

I merely think PX should explain his vote. Schezo by his own admission was being scummy when pushing on me. PX jumped on that wagon without any explanation.

AKA: Not voting PX for a lurker lynch reason. Actually voting PX because I think he's done something scummy that is similar but not the same as what Serela is being voted for.

[Conqueror]

Hmm, sure, I can buy that. I'll let PX defend himself.

[Bardiche]

From nowhere comes the rank smell of decaying and rotting flesh...
A graveyard has been constructed next to town.

VOTECOUNT
BT (1): Old Guy
Serela (3): Conqueror, BT, Schezo
Old Guy (1): WindyKitsune
Raikaria (2): PX, L
Schezo (2): Serela, Dormio
PX (1): Raikaria
Bardiche (0): You're all great, wonderful people and I want you to know I appreciate you.

22 hours left, tick-tock.

[Serela]

I'm :C that all three of the new players literally don't exist.
:C
Okay, Conq asked me again why I think Schezo is scum. I'll go over it again because I don't know anything more to say about it at this point and I really still can't see anyone else worth voting. If I had to vote someone else I -guess- it'd be PX for not having words? Lurker lynches d1 are sort of sad. >_> But people really don't seem interested in Schezo and when I wake up tomorrow there's gonna be like 12 hours left with me apparently having become the main wagon. THAT MAKES A LURKER LYNCH SEEM OKAY I GUESS? We'll see how/if PX responds.

So. Schezo.
1.Schezo accuses Raikaria of adding obfuscation to his posts... which consists of... having thought DaLetterL's name was L. Because it was listed as L in the signups.
2.Schezo later actually votes Raikaria over this. ??? Like, sure, he explained why, but I really can't understand how people think it's bad for me to criticize his reasoning here. It seems absolutely silly to me!
3.Schezo accuses me of being mafia when I reply to both of them talking a bunch about "I did it to help end rvs" and for me siding with Raikaria. I don't understand how any of this is bad. >:C
4.When I continue to think these points are scummy, he votes me over my reasoning. It's a better case than his one on Raikaria, at least? BUT STILL. My reactions to his case listed in previous point!

[PX]

The playerlist calls you L. I was under the impression that was ya username.

I could call OMGUS and vote you for it, but then that would be the pot calling the kettle black

Mostly voting over this bit, this was completely pointless and had no reason to be posted. Literally what was the whole point of saying you'd vote him for OMGUS but it'd also be OMGUS, downshooting your own line of reasoning?
Also I agree with BT from back then. Now back to this point

By Schezo's own admission he was being 'scumtastic' and PX just jumps on it without even explaining. It's worse to jump on a case that's obviously scumtastic than to jump on someone being scumtastic in my books.

Literally why? The only way that association would work is if you think the person who made the initial case was scum, which means you're pairing me and Schezo up to being scum partners, but you think Schezo is town, so

Also I have no idea what Serela is on

[Schezo]

ayyyy.  It's the hyperbole crew.  Yeah, the fact that neither Raikaria or Serela acknowledged the parts PX just pointed out about why I had issue with Raikaria's post
We're just gonna hold on to the "Schezo would be dumb to think this part" (scum play) instead of the actually concerning filler that one could see taking issue with.  You're pushing the weakest part of the post to grab onto like, are you feigning the whole scumhunting thing, or this just makes me look worse.  Probably a combination of both.

Rev up the wagon; but don't all jump on it quite yet.

"lynch him guys, but don't!"

But still; he was putting me at L-2 for no explained reason that early in D1.

This isn't even a bad thing.  Let the mafs come drive by hammer a town unclaimed.  Come on..

1.Schezo accuses Raikaria of adding obfuscation to his posts... which consists of... having thought DaLetterL's name was L. Because it was listed as L in the signups.

Here's where you missed the chance to acknowledge Raikaria had filler play.  Whoops.

2.Schezo later actually votes Raikaria over this. ??? Like, sure, he explained why, but I really can't understand how people think it's bad for me to criticize his reasoning here. It seems absolutely silly to me!

Yeah some absolutely silly stuff happened at the start of day 1 ya'll.  You're not taking context into account.  I'm literally baiting there like, "Hey guys there's a really bad point I see, does anyone else wanna point it out before I get there?" PX just did.

3.Schezo accuses me of being mafia when I reply to both of them talking a bunch about "I did it to help end rvs" and for me siding with Raikaria. I don't understand how any of this is bad. >:C
4.When I continue to think these points are scummy, he votes me over my reasoning. It's a better case than his one on Raikaria, at least? BUT STILL. My reactions to his case listed in previous point!

I'm voting you for being mafia because your case doesn't feel genuine.  It feels more like a game of aha! I see the scum stuff at last.
It's like, really Serela you really think I'm mafia over how I handled RVS?

[Raikaria]

Literally why? The only way that association would work is if you think the person who made the initial case was scum, which means you're pairing me and Schezo up to being scum partners, but you think Schezo is town, so

Except I wasn't pegging your vote as scummy by association. I was pegging your vote as scummy because it had no explanation; showed no effort in scumhunting and was just hopping on a [By Schezo's own admission] scummy-looking wagon.

That has nothing to do with if Schezo is actually scum. In fact, if you were both scum you'd be stupid to do that because then I'd flip town and D2 it would be a case of 'Schezo pushed the townie wagon hard over something so minor and PX hopped on it for absolutely no reason they're scum'.

ayyyy.  It's the hyperbole crew.  Yeah, the fact that neither Raikaria or Serela acknowledged the parts PX just pointed out about why I had issue with Raikaria's post
We're just gonna hold on to the "Schezo would be dumb to think this part" (scum play) instead of the actually concerning filler that one could see taking issue with. 

I'd have explained that part if someone had actually talked about that part. I assumed you had issue with me calling him L. No-one corrected me.

Also as I said in my return from work post; there was something else in one of your posts I disliked; [The appeal to meta with Ace Attorney Mafia] just further developments made it pointless to attack since it changed my opinions.

Although I do also wonder why people are making a big deal about 'filler play' in someone's 2nd post in the entire game that was during RVS. If that's the case; everyone who posted before me is guilty of that too. That said; the fact I find that a bad thing adds onto the 'I was being scumtastic to bait people' gambit Schezo is claiming to have done. And I don't see why he would have revealed the gambit when he did if it wasn't legitimate.

[Serela]

Maybe I'm rustier at mafia than I thought ;_; I never liked d1 in the first place.

Wait, so people actually like... significantly care about Raikaria's omgus sentence? Like wut? That's the reason PX is voting Raikaria? This is blowing my mind here. It's pretty much obviously a total joke line in rvs. I mean, for Schezo to push it is one thing (I guess... since it was still page 1 rvs) but then for PX to come drive-by vote it much later is dude wut, ontop of not explaining his vote until now, but even then I still think voting a pointless rvs joke line once the game has sorta picked up is just awful; the fact that he didn't explain the vote until he got flak about it is just gross icing on the cake.

I guess it's "filler", yes. But everything on page one (save maybe schezo's post) is this, I can't see how Raikaria's joke is possibly any scummier than the rest (As far as I can tell it's roughly identical to my line to BT for being "Appeasing"), and PX going after it at this point and in the method he did it seems like a total excuse of a vote.

B##Accuse:PX

I still don't like Schezo >:C But apart from PX looking actively scummier, I guess I can at least see why he's (Schezo's) voting me now, GRUDGINGLY. I don't exactly agree with his reasoning but I can at least understand how he got from point A to point B. Plus there's also nearly interest in voting him anyway and we've got like 10 hours or something, so we're heavily into consolidation time.

[Serela]

oops, well just in case

##Revote:PX

[Serela]

*plus there's also nearly no interest in voting

ebwop

[DaLetterEl]

Sorry all, finals season got a hold of me. I'll be back in some hours to post.

[BT]

Hey, new players!

If you're reading this right now, don't freak out! You don't have to wade through all the arguments in the thread. Just your general feelings about the game will be fine - who's the most trustworthy? Who would you keep away from? Start posting, and it'll be easier from there.

[Serela]

Deadline in 5 hours

[Raikaria]

Deadline in 5 hours

Wait what already?

And all our new players haven't even made a meaningful post. Shame; since I could really use more people's opinions on what's going on instead of us lot being an echo chamber.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

6AM and I have to head out for work in a bit so I'm just going to be posting my ramblings.

Will not be around for deadline.
I'm still not liking Schezo.
I find it funny that he says this in #75:

It feels more like a game of aha!

When I feel that he's just as guilty of doing something similar in #63

If I had to choose between Raikaria and Serela, who are the other currently viable wagons, I would have to put my vote on Serela.
It feels like, to me, Raikaria is actually being pretty earnest about trying to find scum in his own way whereas Serela is...
I dunno, feels like his early game was super forced. Like he was trying to get his name out there as "Hey look at me I'm doing the things".
Example: #48
Like, he says it's bad to outright state that you took some action to end RVS but he doesn't really do anything with the information?
You know, like, he's already voting Schezo and says that it's terrible that both Schezo and Raikaria did the same thing but he doesn't really seem to take it into consideration in his future posts?
I feel as though, given Schezo and Raikaria were the only interesting people at this point and Serela said as much, this should be far more important to Serela and not just a throwaway point?
I also don't like Serela's #58 where he simply states that he agrees with my entire post about Schezo.
Like, surely there must be some points in there that you either don't agree with or agree with more than others?
Feels, again, like a throwaway motion if you're just going to say "yeah I agree with that person over there" and not explain which parts you agree with and how they shape your opinion.
Also I don't understand the case that Serela is making on PX. Why PX over any of the other lurkers?
Also while I was typing this I think I convinced myself but maybe it's just deadline pressure getting to me and knowing that I won't be around for it.
Maybe.

##Unvote
##Vote Serela

[Conqueror]

PX, do you have anything to say about Raikaria other than the OMGUS thing? It wasn't a useful thing to say but that doesn't necessarily mean it's scummy so it's weird to me that you're mainly voting him over that.
I do agree that Raikaria's contention that PX didn't vote Schezo for being scumtastic is weird (but I don't think scummy weird) because a) that was Schezo's own description of his play (wtf Schezo) and b) even in that case I assume PX would have found both Raikaria and Schezo scummy so it's not weird he'd vote either one.

I just mainly wanted to say that I think Serela's sudden "realization" of PX's vote being awful seems completely contrived since the drive-by vote already existed and the grudging acceptance of Schezo's vote, god the entire thing just feels slimy. I dunno, if someone else had typed this out I might have been okay with it but I don't think this is town Serela.

Serela, claim.

[Serela]

Also I don't understand the case that Serela is making on PX. Why PX over any of the other lurkers?

...did you even read my post?

I'm not even voting PX for lurking.

Like seriously.

I'm voting PX because this far into the day, he explicitly stated he's voting Raikaria for an RVS joke line. Ontop of the fact that he dropped the vote earlier with no words which made it worse, but the main reason is that the vote's reason is awful.

As for the rest of your stuff against me, I didn't say it's bad to state that about RVS. I dunno where you got that. That's also where you're confused I didn't "take it in consideration" and treated it as throwaway that Raikaria/Schezo both did some terrible thing- because they didn't.

In the post where I said I agreed with you I later (in that post) stated some reasons which coincided with yours.

cut

[Conqueror]

Granted I know that PX only made his clarification recently.

SERELA WHY ARE YOU SO CALM ARE YOU REALLY SERELA

[Serela]

I just mainly wanted to say that I think Serela's sudden "realization" of PX's vote being awful seems completely contrived since the drive-by vote already existed

The drive-by vote wasn't good but lynching him over that D1 would have been the lamest lurker lynch ever, and lurker lynches d1 are lameo lame to start with.

But then he explained the -reason- behind the vote and the reason was awful.

I'm vanilla town.

[Serela]

CONQ WE HAVEN'T PLAYED MAFIA IN LIKE OVER A YEAR

PEOPLE CHAAAAANGE

ALSO IT'S D1 AND THERE'S BEEN A VERY LOW AMOUNT OF TALKING, IN FACT EXTREMELY LITTLE HAS HAPPENED.

THERE'S LIKE NOTHING ELSE I CAN EVEN SAY D: