Support NeoGAF

[TheWorthyEdge]

Interesting and peculiar doesn't mean suspicious, and can stimulate discussion. I think what TB tried to do was a good move but the way he ended up wording his follow up posts confused the issue and threw the focus away from Palmer and onto him. Maybe not the intended outcome, but it still served a purpose. I'm sure he knew when doing it that there was a risk it would turn on him, and it seems unlikely a mobster would take that risk. I mean there is always the chance that it's an incredibly ballsy move to try and build credibility/trust on day 1 but it just seems like too big a risk too early in the game for a mobster play to me.
It also seems like the type of play that the whole mob would want to discuss before actually putting it into effect and TB made that post pretty quickly after the PMs went out.


For your first point: Sometimes someone will post something that just doesn't feel right to me, and when theres little solid info to work with gut feelings are hard to shake and as a good a guide as anything.


Basing votes on previous games seems a bit unfair on the new players but, for the early days, my feeling is I want to keep in players that are likely to be engaged with the game and post useful content, most of the returning players have already demonstrated that. It's not to do with time played either, Barry went out first in the last game, but even in that short time I feel his posts contributed more than people who lasted longer.

Understood. These are the posts I like. Interesting, thought provoking, and helpful. In that case then I think TB should be safe. If we do vote random then we have a chance of bringing out a role or Hutt.

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

That is completely reasonable, actually. The issue is, I guess, determining what qualifies as "sort of suspicious".

I qualify, TheWorthyEdge qualifies, anyone who claims to be searching but is actually following other people is definitely suspicious.

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

I qualify, TheWorthyEdge qualifies, anyone who claims to be searching but is actually following other people is definitely suspicious.

Agreed. I do think that you are innocent though and I don't want to vote you off because of how verbal you are.

 

[exmachina64]

He had posted.

Saw it after I posted, couldn't go back and edit.

 

[exmachina64]

UNVOTE: Terrabyte20xx

VOTE: TheWorthyEdge

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

May I ask why? Just wondering.

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

I think my problem is Im being to verbal and concerned, asking to many questions so I can see your guys' justification.

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

I think my problem is Im being to verbal and concerned, asking to many questions so I can see your guys' justification.

That is problem worth having, don't change your playstyle.

 

[Makai]

I think my problem is Im being to verbal and concerned, asking to many questions so I can see your guys' justification.

You also quickly voted for swamped to break the tie when vote pressure was applied to you. However, that is totally rational given your circumstances and is not inherently suspicious.

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

You also quickly voted for swamped to break the tie when vote pressure was applied to you. However, that is totally rational given your circumstances and is not inherently suspicious.

True that was a bad decision to just outright vote right there, but like you said I started to feel the pressure.

 

[Palmer_v1]

Interesting and peculiar doesn't mean suspicious, and can stimulate discussion. I think what TB tried to do was a good move but the way he ended up wording his follow up posts confused the issue and threw the focus away from Palmer and onto him. Maybe not the intended outcome, but it still served a purpose. I'm sure he knew when doing it that there was a risk it would turn on him, and it seems unlikely a mobster would take that risk. I mean there is always the chance that it's an incredibly ballsy move to try and build credibility/trust on day 1 but it just seems like too big a risk too early in the game for a mobster play to me.
It also seems like the type of play that the whole mob would want to discuss before actually putting it into effect and TB made that post pretty quickly after the PMs went out.


For your first point: Sometimes someone will post something that just doesn't feel right to me, and when theres little solid info to work with gut feelings are hard to shake and as a good a guide as anything.


Basing votes on previous games seems a bit unfair on the new players but, for the early days, my feeling is I want to keep in players that are likely to be engaged with the game and post useful content, most of the returning players have already demonstrated that. It's not to do with time played either, Barry went out first in the last game, but even in that short time I feel his posts contributed more than people who lasted longer.

I liked what TB was attempting overall, which is why I said I wouldn't vote for him this day phase. Picking me, specifically, was probably not the best idea. I'm kind of an open book anyway, and don't really get shaken easily. The surprising part was seeing who jumped in to pile on or defend me or TB.

Anyway, I'm 50/50 on No Detain vs detaining a random low count poster.

 

[MattyG]

Time remaining in the current day phase:

Current votes
13 votes are needed for a majority descision
Names with a strike voted and then unvoted

TheWorthyEdge (3)
CzarTim
Barrylocke
exmachina64

swamped (3)
traube
Lord of Castamere
TheWorthyEdge

Palmer_v1 (1)
Terrabyte20xx

Terrabyte20xx (0)
exmachina64

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

Is there per chance a role where people are so closely knit together that they have to vote the same way?

 

[Makai]

Did Terrabyte unvote? I thought he was still voting for Palmer.

 

[MattyG]

Did Terrabyte unvote? I thought he was still voting for Palmer.

You're right, I missed that post. It's in the tally now. My apologies!

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

Exmachina if you are with us, I want to know why you voted me.

 

[johnnyquicknives]

UNVOTE: Terrabyte20xx

VOTE: TheWorthyEdge

To me this is the type of post that sets me on edge.

1) Exmachina has been posting quite a bit, but with very little actual content.
2) It's following pack mentality.

At this early stage I don't see the point in heaping on a vote. I can see the merit in voting for someone to get discussion on them started but piling on without adding to the conversation seems premature to me. We still have a couple of days to discuss our votes, rushing to get someone detained doesn't really help us.

At the moment I'm wavering on Worthy, I agree his posts look a bit suspicious but for now I'm not sure whether I feel the questioning/inexperience is genuine or deliberately being played that way.

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

UNVOTE: Terrabyte20xx

VOTE: TheWorthyEdge

I was waiting to see what he was going to do after this, such as giving a reason for the sudden shift in vote. He hasn't. Frankly, I'm inclined to trust TheWorthyEdge. He comes across as a newbie who is trying to attain information for things he is uncertain of.

This really rubs me the wrong way. Combined with this:

That is fair, but I am confident in my decisions, so I would advise anyone who might share the sentiment to hold on a little longer before voting me as well, the last thing we would want is a bandwagon for the huts to jump on to end the day early.

Well of course you would say that about your decisions.

Makes me suspicious enough to change my vote.

UNVOTE: Palmer_v1

VOTE: exmachina64

I look forward to your rebuttal.

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

TheWorthyEdge, have you ever played mafia before?

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

I'll tell you guys what I think and it may set some people off in voting for me. I honestly don't think that based off of what I asked, which was asking for an answer on why we shouldn't vote TB, which I got, that I should've been voted for by CzarTim. After that Barrylocke votes for me based off of 'similar' terms but without an actual reason for voting me off. I've been verbal this whole time and if you were a rebel you would want that right? But if you were a Hutt then you would want to shut these people up first. After that exmachina voted for me for absolutely no reason (that we know of right now). How is this not suspicious? If you were a rebel wouldn't you want someone concerned and questioning anything at all even if it is a bit suspicious?

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

TheWorthyEdge, have you ever played mafia before?

I have, and I could've lied and said I haven't, but I have. This will hurt me I'm sure of it but in play Mafia quite a bit at parties and such

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

How about online?

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

How about online?

No only live. I always play concerned and question things I think are suspicious, which is a risk.

 

[exmachina64]

Exmachina if you are with us, I want to know why you voted me.

Random, truthfully. The initiative to detain Terrabyte faded away and people in the thread seem to have accepted his explanation. Currently, you and Swamped are the leading candidates for detainment on day one. Swamped hasn't been as active in the thread and I don't really like voting randomly for an inactive member.

Am I being invited to join the coalition? Because I'll change my vote if that's the case.

I wish the people who don't want to detain someone on the first day would officially vote "no detain."

I didn't realize when I signed up for GAF Mafia that one day and night cycle lasted one week, which means this game will take months.

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

Random, truthfully. The initiative to detain Terrabyte faded away and people in the thread seem to have accepted his explanation. Currently, you and Swamped are the leading candidates for detainment on day one. Swamped hasn't been as active in the thread and I don't really like voting randomly for an inactive member.

Am I being invited to join the coalition? Because I'll change my vote if that's the case.

I wish the people who don't want to detain someone on the first day would officially vote "no detain."

I didn't realize when I signed up for GAF Mafia that one day and night cycle lasted one week, which means this game will take months.

Wouldnt you rather take out someone who doesn't talk if you were a rebel than someone who is concerned for the group???

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

No only live. I always play concerned and question things I think are suspicious, which is a risk.

That makes complete sense.

Online and face to face are two totally different beasts. Because text is neutral things that face to face would be totally normal look suspicious online.

I like your questioning. More importantly, once you've made a decision you stick with it, and modify it when new facts come to light. I honestly believe you are rebel from all your posts.

 

[Makai]

I wish the people who don't want to detain someone on the first day would officially vote "no detain."

I'm waiting for more daylight to burn in case anything revealing comes up. Nothing worthwhile yet, imo.

I didn't realize when I signed up for GAF Mafia that one day and night cycle lasted one week, which means this game will take months.

How many days does a game typically last?

 

[exmachina64]

I've also played Mafia irl, but never online. I wasn't expecting the pace to be what it is and I now understand that it's much slower.

Sorry for voting for you randomly, Worthy, I now understand that doing so was harmful to the game. I'll change my vote and hold off voting again for a while.

UNVOTE: TheWorthyEdge

 

[exmachina64]

How many days does a game typically last?

Other players can say better than I, I've only skimmed the previous thread. The one week comment is if the whole day lasted ninety-six hours and the whole night lasted seventy-two.

 

[johnnyquicknives]

I wish the people who don't want to detain someone on the first day would officially vote "no detain."

That speeds the day phase up and curbs discussion, the more discussion we engage in the more we have to analyse in future days. Even if you don't want to detain you learn a lot from watching debates unfold.

I didn't realize when I signed up for GAF Mafia that one day and night cycle lasted one week, which means this game will take months.

We did mention it in the recruitment post, the first game was Jan-Apr, if you go the distance it can be a pretty big undertaking.

 

[Palmer_v1]

Random, truthfully. The initiative to detain Terrabyte faded away and people in the thread seem to have accepted his explanation. Currently, you and Swamped are the leading candidates for detainment on day one. Swamped hasn't been as active in the thread and I don't really like voting randomly for an inactive member.

Am I being invited to join the coalition? Because I'll change my vote if that's the case.

I wish the people who don't want to detain someone on the first day would officially vote "no detain."

I didn't realize when I signed up for GAF Mafia that one day and night cycle lasted one week, which means this game will take months.

The last game took around 4 months. There will be times it goes faster cause we have an obvious course of action, but initially, it's just a clusterfuck.

I hesitate to target people for being novices on the first day. I would have been a prime candidate last game, for example.

 

[Palmer_v1]

I've also played Mafia irl, but never online. I wasn't expecting the pace to be what it is and I now understand that it's much slower.

Sorry for voting for you randomly, Worthy, I now understand that doing so was harmful to the game. I'll change my vote and hold off voting again for a while.

UNVOTE: TheWorthyEdge

Yeah, I discovered last game that the way it plays IRL is not really the same as in a forum. You lose all of the physical tells, have no idea what roles exist, and it's tougher to put people on the spot. I oviously grew to love it, though.

 

[Setre]

After reading everything up until now I’d say that Terrabyte20xx still seems suspicious to me. I understand his reasoning behind what he did but his actions have caused everyone to start casting votes either randomly or because they think that person is “suspicious”. We have no, to very, little information to go on right now and we’re basically just pointing at one another and screaming “Get’em!”.

 

[johnnyquicknives]

We have no, to very, little information to go on right now and we’re basically just pointing at one another and screaming “Get’em!”.

Welcome to forum mafia.

 

[OceanicAir]

It's really hard to find anyone of serious note with about only half of us posting a considerable amount. We need more people posting (myself included) I think that Setre is the only one who hasn't posted yet.

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

Forum mafia is a much more psychological game that face to face mafia because of those reasons. You have look at every post and ask yourself: 'Why did he say that? Why is it worded that specific way? What is his motivation?'

 

[OceanicAir]

Well there Setre is lol

 

[exmachina64]

That speeds the day phase up and curbs discussion, the more discussion we engage in the more we have to analyse in future days. Even if you don't want to detain you learn a lot from watching debates unfold.

We did mention it in the recruitment post, the first game was Jan-Apr, if you go the distance it can be a pretty big undertaking.

Obviously that affects the amount players with busy schedules can contribute to discussion and that negatively affects the game. Though I made that post not long ago, I regret saying that. Having a better understanding of the length has changed my perspective.

The last game took around 4 months. There will be times it goes faster cause we have an obvious course of action, but initially, it's just a clusterfuck.

I hesitate to target people for being novices on the first day. I would have been a prime candidate last game, for example.

Yeah, I discovered last game that the way it plays IRL is not really the same as in a forum. You lose all of the physical tells, have no idea what roles exist, and it's tougher to put people on the spot. I oviously grew to love it, though.

Yeah, I'm obviously a novice to online Mafia and I was approaching the game incorrectly. I probably shouldn't be checking the thread as much as I am. Sorry to Terrabyte and everyone else for fucking it up.

 

[exmachina64]

We have no, to very, little information to go on right now and we’re basically just pointing at one another and screaming “Get’em!”.

Yep.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Swamped hasn't been as active in the thread and I don't really like voting randomly for an inactive member.

You need to start liking it. Inactivity is a poison that shields the Hutts. The more posts the Hutt make the more chances for inconsistency. By not posting actively you are putting active members at risk for Hutt hits and letting Hutts hide with you. Any Inactivity Supporters here are my enemy.

 

[CzarTim]

UNVOTE: TheWorthyEdge

Worthy, I voted for you because you made several claims that you thought TB was suspect without actually voting. I was looking to see your reaction and for now I think you are being genuine.


Going to read through the thread again and see what pops out to me.

 

[CzarTim]

You need to start liking it. Inactivity is a poison that shields the Hutts. The more posts the Hutt make the more chances for inconsistency. By not posting actively you are putting active members at risk for Hutt hits and letting Hutts hide with you. Any Inactivity Supporters here are my enemy.

I agree. But this game started on a Saturday night. I'll withhold judgment for inactivity until Monday night.

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

Do the Hutts know who their fellow Hutts are?

 

[CzarTim]

Do the Hutts know who their fellow Hutts are?

Yes.

 

[exmachina64]

You need to start liking it. Inactivity is a poison that shields the Hutts. The more posts the Hutt make the more chances for inconsistency. By not posting actively you are putting active members at risk for Hutt hits and letting Hutts hide with you. Any Inactivity Supporters here are my enemy.

Of course.

 

[TheWorthyEdge]

Dumb question. Of course they do

 

[CzarTim]

Also they should have a private forum to talk in.

 

[Setre]

Welcome to forum mafia.

I get it, I do. But if we're going to randomly start out choosing someone why not do it with actual randomness? There are 23 of us it's not hard to put that number into a random number generator and post a screen cap of the number that pops up.

Like so:

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/LsWE1kG.jpg[/IMG]

If we go by that, true randomness, we should pick Redhood56. I want to clarify I'm not suggesting we vote for him but if we want to do it by true randomness on the first day, that's the way.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

I agree. But this game started on a Saturday night. I'll withhold judgment for inactivity until Monday night.

Well yeah. We won't really be able to really gage inactivity until Day 2.

I'm just saying. If anyone here tries to coast through with minimal posts, I'll make it my mission to Detain you.

 

[Makai]

I get it, I do. But if we're going to randomly start out choosing someone why not do it with actual randomness? There are 23 of us it's not hard to put that number into a random number generator and post a screen cap of the number that pops up.

Like so:

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/LsWE1kG.jpg[/IMG]

If we go by that, true randomness, we should pick Redhood56. I want to clarify I'm not suggesting we vote for him but if we want to do it by true randomness on the first day, that's the way.

It's also not hard to change the HTML to get the number you want.