Third replacement? It's starting to get creepy... ;)

It is! The game may well be cursed!

Luckily so far only one has been anything but a bog-standard role, so... We will see!

EDIT: Before you tricky bastards try to read into that: I mean bog-standard as in not-fragile. The game will not break if two of the three roles so far were stretched and toyed with, the other one could well be damaging to it.

I'm going to ask this, because I'm not sure you realize it: DO YOU HAVE ANY CLUE HOW SCUMMY YOU COME ACROSS?!

We're going to lynch people because their play may be dangerous? I was the first vote on the lynchwagons of 2 innocents, maybe *I* Should be lynched then because obviously I'm a danger to day 1 townies? A particular style of play should be no reason to lynch anyone, especially this early as a 'danger' to others. At least, not in this particular case.

Actually, you're not the first person to say that, but I really struggle to see what I've said that gives this impression.

OK - can I just insert into the massive nmillar / Rodzaju fight that I seem to have sparked off , and reiterate what it was all about in the first place, because I think it's got lost in all the bickering, and I happen to think it does constitute evidence against nmillar - which is based solely on this game

Basically Rod floated the idea of experienced people being Mafia. Here's what I said right back at the start of all this....

'On the Ghost 'fragile roles given to experienced players' and the assertion that knowing this serves as no advantage at all.......its info, coming from the MOD, therefore it HAS to be taken into consideration. I dont think for a moment all Mafia are experienced players, thats far too obvious.

What has struck me here is reactions when the idea was floated - instead of a normal considered rebuttal which is their usual modus operandi, nmillar was straight in with a sarcastic derisive reply, as if to say how silly (post 116), and then again in post 146 he mentioned it again -and again refers to it in post 265. Such a negative response to it makes me wonder - its more than likely that theres at least ONE Mafia thats an experienced player, so therefore that player would be very quick indeed to rebuff any suggestion that that's what the MOD has done... '

I ask that those posts are looked at - its NOTHING to do with meta gaming, or past behaviours. nmillar, for me, has been far too overzealous in his dismissals, with no real reasoning behind it. To me, that reeks of Scum.

Yeah, but you have impeccable taste about who to protect ;-}

I have to be honest here, I did read all three posts, and I have to admit that I must not be seeing anything. I see someone being attacked and trying to defend himself without drawing into metagaming, and then we got what Rodzaju just brought to the forefront recently.

What makes it so scummy is that you're attacking someone not for what they've brought to the table this game, but for their play in other games. It's an argument that's purely metagaming and thus, doesn't always hold meaning in this setup. We have no clue what his role is and you can be attacking a townie or a power role just because of the player's actions in other games.

It's the equivalent of me saying 'Oh, Orryyrro is always a lurker, we should lynch him now so that he can't get into Lynch or Lose and have his luckiness murk up the decision'. It's not a matter of if he's town or not, but that he was lurking, and that's something he's trying to change in this game.

OK, but is it not good advice to study previous games to get an idea of how someone plays?
That comparing their conduct in previous games (Where their alignment is now known) can give clues to their alignment in an ongoing game?

OK, so your statement suggest, you are using meta-game to determine he is acting differently in this game than in previous game where he was town and it makes him scum. right?
No, you are not doing this at all.
You said you vote him because you don't like his style of play and find it potentionally harmful for town. This is quite different matter.

No.
Twilight said that meta-gaming is bad.
I'm trying to determine if ALL meta-gaming is bad, or if I'm just doing it wrong.
My post 369 is not directly connected to the last few pages.

I think this kind of leap is where I am falling down.
Which raises the further question:
Is the fault that I leap from one subject to another without adequate explanation?
Or is it that I post 2 unrelated items & someone makes a leap of logic & conects them?

I think the argument to how effective Metagaming is probably isn't one I'm equipped to answer in all honesty. I'm going to have to say, take previous play with a pinch of salt, sometimes people can decide to play with a different style to see if it fits well with them. But again, everyone finds something that works for them, that's why each game ends up being so interesting.

You came out and said you wanted him lynched because of his playstyle in being aggressive, but you can't meta a Mafia argument into that because you have no clue how he would play as Mafia.

Clearly, Nmillar has been trying out different playstyles.
He said that his game has been evolving as he plays.
The last 2 games have shown a settling of that playstyle.
Extrapolating that playstyle & the influence that it seems to give him into a game where he is Mafia is what gives rise to the danger I see.
It is not simply that he is aggressive, but that he is aggressive with no qualms about misquoting to exaggerate the amount of mud he flings around.

Completely unrelated:
Referencing a past game as a learning experience, not related to current game:

Look at the arguement between me & Popinjay in Day 1 of game 4.
I RVS Pop.
He over-reacts.
I logically pull apart his posts, showing how his attacks are omgus & why I am suspicous of him.
But the rest of the participants see me as more mafia than him.
How? Why? This is where I don't get it.

I think everyone's guilty of selective quoting, and I'm willing to bet it's mainly because the rest of the post doesn't have anything to do with what they're arguing. Hell, people do this outside of the game too in arguments anyway.

And there is a great way to counter people misquoting you, using the forum setup to QUOTE YOURSELF.

As for the game 4, I really don't want to get into that too deeply here, but I would like to remind you that Popinjay was our day 1 lynch, not you.

To be fair I think anyone who was mafia(me included) would have jumped on popinjay like a shark smelling blood with some of the things he came out with, his arguements were poor and his refusal to claim did no favors , He edited a post and should have got modkilled anyway. He imho was the only reason you even made it past day one with the giant hole you dug yourself.

Yes In game 4 he finally got me but he did have to sacrifice eyeball,ghost and elbaz to do it so I can see where your coming from in that sense of the arguement, His bull in a china shop usually gets his target but are they always the correct one?

Problem is as much I find past game's not a factor, your playing exactly like you are in games 4 and 5 when you were mafia, you seem to either want to take the world on or with your current arguement dig yourself a giant hole.

You make a lot of good points but I'll admit it like me in game 5 in my case took to way to much of a risk and bite more than you can chew. As a town member whilst a threat you could also be seen as an easy lynch target by the mafia and Nmillar seems to know what buttons to press, the arguement was like watching a couple deer lock horns.

As odd as it is sounding I seem to get a town vibe more on you than nmillar, plus with all the talk of stats whats likely to be more occurant, you going mafia 3 games in a row or nmillar being town in all 6?

Could be one of you two but Im sure your not alone and theres still 11 other people to try and work out so.....

Main thing I find suspect is thiev has kept quiet when we all voted yet instantly made some comment regarding teleroth needing a replacement, did that timing to post and yet not say something else relevant a little odd? If are as expendible as you claim why given the whole confusion today shant we just pick you as a safe lynch and hope to gain from the night actions.

@pazzer what makes vitek single out for you to be innocent yet we are all guilty, It could appear your protecting him, highlighting him as a lynch target in the future OR could be working together

@ghost I dont want to sound like a dick but I think comment 362 should be edited as It leaves a lot of speculation as to what you meant by that. You keep putting theories into my head.

@robbe I think your reasoning of a nmillar vote is similar to why my vote is and staying on thiev to he gives me a reason to remove it,

I have a feeling its 2 groups of 2 atm with the way the discussion is panning out. Maybe with an old hand and a young blood being paired up.

I havent a clue what Ty's faction was so I guess im glad hes getting subbed, I have no insight from Baz or Orryyrro either

TB and Dam Im unsure about but dont have anything remotely solid to say which side otherwise

Edit:I forgot Quad was even in the game lol sorry