After Pesco screwed with me in that game I think I actually started playing okay 
Ahh, this reminds me. I saw your Wall of IIoA on FAV in the thread, and I thought it would have been pretty awesome if you hadn't both backed down, and gone all Newest edition of the bunbunmaru on it. I sort of wanted to help you with that, but I decided to wait until after game.
I'll post it in this topic, since new players are more likely to come by here than at the end of a GOed mafia game.
Zakeri's Tips and Trick to Critical Thinking! DorfFort editionBrought to you by Professor Layton.TMSo, you've made a huge wall of text. It's longer than all of that lurker's posts combined, it's got more words per sentence than a 7 year old's essay about what he did last summer. It's even punctuated correctly. You post it to the topic, and await all of the votes inevitable joining the bandwagon you started.
And then suddenly Roukanken swiftly dodges in and says "Wow, giant wall of IIoA is worthless."
Huh? What? That's it? umuuu~...
So what went wrong? Well, if you look back at your post, you might realize it's mostly filled with comments about how Player X "Did this in post #ABC" followed by a comment on how "That makes him look sort of bad." With the statement at the very end saying "This makes him look
REALLY sort of bad." This doesn't make for a very strong, nor efficient argument. So, what can you do to improve?
Let's start by defining IIoA. It is an acronym which stands for "Information Instead of Analysis." What it means, is that while your post on the outside looks like it has a lot of content, it actually avoids bringing up ideas that aren't readily apparent. Anyone and Everyone can look through the previous posts and find that Player X did what he did in post #ABC. What you need to do in mafia to progress however is find the meaning behind why he did what he did then. You must Analyze the situation instead.
The question at this point however is what is the difference between Information and Analysis? This isn't obvious to people who are new to our style of mafia, and when brought up during the game, the player usually never finds out anything outside of "Anaylsis Good, Everything else makes Rou's head hurt."
The simplest way to answer this question is through the simile that Analysis is like Smithing. In short, it is the Synthesis of Two or more pieces of information into new information. Information is like jewerly - you first mine it from the thread like any ordinary gem or ore from rock. Then you must refine this information by asking questions directly to the source of the action. Then finally, you must take that refined information, and combine it with the other metals and gems you've gather to make a new piece of jewelry. This new jewelry, this new piece of information can then be put in the thread for evaluation by others. And trust me, Jewerly will always sell for a higher price than unrefined ores or uncut gems.
"Wow!" You shout, feigning interest. "That was so enlightening. I'm going to go to the next mafia game now and use this information to my knowledge!"
"Apt apt apt!" I halt you in your attempt to escape. "Everything I've said up to now has been useless drivel!"
"Oh, so you admit it." You reply sharply. I ignore your cutting remark, and the brief soreness in my heart that follows.
"Next, I'll be discussing just how this knowledge can be applied to Mafia games."
Now, back to the original post~ The first thing you need is of course, Information, and the main accusation on the post is that it's just information. What you should do is condense it down to just bulletpoints about what the person in question did. Here is an example of what I collect in Dwarf Fortress Mafia on Pesco before he brought up the case on Neo Serela
55 Claims me idiot scum.
65 semiclears Kilga on idiocy, still voting me.
83 Adds pressure to the bennywagon. Seems to be mostly because Benny posted a tiny bit of fluff.
90 defends switch to Benny by asking if his case on me was better.
97 Claims my later actions null. Keeps vote on Benny.
101 bothers Rou about his argument over me and Pesco, then voting Carth for lurking.
146 agrees with why I say Rou is town.
Wants to Vig Benny
Leads Neo to say his vote on Excal is due to not scumhunting.
Claims one of Excal or Kefit is scum. Votes Kefit.
The posts numbers are important, since that's how you and others go back for easy reference.
Now, what can we deduce from this?
-in 97, he keeps his vote on benny in spite of the wagon being detoured. In 146, he expresses his frusteration of the benny wagon failing by threatening a vig shot on him. It's safe to say he's certain Benny is scum.
-In 55, He votes me. Later, after the vote switch, he proclaims me town based on Meta, and uses the frailty of his case on me to justify staying on Benny.
-In 146, he claims one of Excal or Kefit are scum, then votes Kefit after asking Neo Serela a question about why he's voting Excal. This suggests that he doesn't trust Neo enough to be comfortable adding a vote onto a wagon he's on.
What does this all likely mean: If Benny and Neo Serela are town, and I am scum, Pesco may very likely be scum.
This is just a sample of what Analysis can do for you - this is all information gathered from the first half of day one, and it can already be used to determine quite a few things. Granted, this conclusion turned out to be wrong, but then again, I was in the mafia. I could easily have turned this bit into my scumpartners to use at a later date to get a bandwagon going on Pesco.
Hopefully, after seeing me go through this process, anyone who is confused about how to make a case on someone will be able to work more effectively. Remember, the natural end of this and the goal you should strive for is to determine a person's true feelings on people and compare them with what they flipped in the end. This will never work on day one, but will work progressively better as the game continues and more people die.
Thank you for your time.
