Magic Market Index for March 15th, 2019
 
Magic Market Index for Feb 8th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Feb 1st, 2019
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Ah, got it. I was misreading #2336 to be a scumlist, but it's just "who should you reread" list. Then you do have tom in townlist later. Never mind.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Chris: How do you square a scum!anak read with a scum!tom read? Yes, bussing exists - but do you think their interactions specifically have been a likely situation for bussing, and why? Do you see anything in the posts that points to them being bus/distancing?
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    *except about chris
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Quote from osieorb18 »
    Associatives for future reference. The obvious ones:
    town!Osie -> town!Chris (major force in turning the wagon away here)
    scum!anak -> town!tom (on Mind/Anak much of the game)

    More speculative:
    scum!anak -?> town!Chris (without the push against Osie, Anak would live today)
    scum!Osie -?> town!tom (lighter than the anak-tom connection because this feels more plausibly like it could be distance/bus)

    town!anak -??> scum!tom (Very light - town/town conflict is quite plausible here, but certainly it doesn't make Tom look better.)


    Eww. This excludes so many perfectly possible and reasonable worlds.

    And Anak flipping scum in no way clears Tom.
    Which worlds am I excluding?

    Do you mean associatives I didn't cover? This wasn't meant to be an exhaustive list of possibilities, just the ones that give associatives I've already seen. For example, town!Osie doesn't immediately say anything, even about Tom (less so than town!anak, IMO).
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    @Chris: What is your opinion on Osie's hypothesis of the "car salesman"? I called it out in #2160 and never got a satisfactory answer, and others mentioned it and didn't get answers either. Quoting from my 2160:

    Osie:

    But the Tau-town-tinfoil is that could see it being the case that EtR pulled a car salesman on Tau and made them decide that they wanted to buy into the car/gambit. A similar, more likely possibility is that scum!Tau suggested the Gambit as if they were town and EtR bought into it.

    How can EtR pull a car salesman on Tau when, by both of their accounts, EtR didn't post anything in the pre-game thread?

    How can Tau suggest that gambit "as if they were town"? The gambit literally involves claiming scum in the pre-game thread.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Associatives for future reference. The obvious ones:
    town!Osie -> town!Chris (major force in turning the wagon away here)
    scum!anak -> town!tom (on Mind/Anak much of the game)

    More speculative:
    scum!anak -?> town!Chris (without the push against Osie, Anak would live today)
    scum!Osie -?> town!tom (lighter than the anak-tom connection because this feels more plausibly like it could be distance/bus)

    town!anak -??> scum!tom (Very light - town/town conflict is quite plausible here, but certainly it doesn't make Tom look better.)
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Pocket might be the wrong term there. Appeal to flattery? Not sure what to call it.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    I'm fine with both Osie and Anak, preference to Anak. I dislike Osie's strong indignation-style AtEs, but Anak reads more desperate. The way he addresses Chris in particular feels like a pocket attempt.

    I want people to review LnGrrr and Vaimes. I notice Vaimes in particular sheeped in again - #2304.

    Chris reads town and I had D_V as town before, so that slot is good. So far KJ, GF, Chris looking like a good town cluster. (Amusingly, all with a scumlean or scumread on me, I think. Not too surprising given that I was hard on the EtR-cluster D1 and turned out to be wrong.)
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Quote from Highroller »
    It looks like an accusation, but GF is pretty solidly cleared.
    How so?
    KJ claimed an explicit cop check. Which is a low-probability scum/scum play, and hasn't been CC'ed by another cop or refuted by any other mechanical effect.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Quote from LnGrrrR »
    PTAP, been reading along but not much time to pos.

    @Osie, let's say your slot is town. You need a viable counter wagon. Who is it?
    This is strange. It can be semantically parsed as "who do you think is scum?", but the way it's actually structured feels artificial.

    Osie:
    But the Tau-town-tinfoil is that could see it being the case that EtR pulled a car salesman on Tau and made them decide that they wanted to buy into the car/gambit. A similar, more likely possibility is that scum!Tau suggested the Gambit as if they were town and EtR bought into it.
    How can EtR pull a car salesman on Tau when, by both of their accounts, EtR didn't post anything in the pre-game thread?

    How can Tau suggest that gambit "as if they were town"? The gambit literally involves claiming scum in the pre-game thread.

    So what I'm getting from this is that either you're openly lying or you'll be voting Tom as soon as I flip town.
    What's the purpose of this post? It looks like an accusation, but GF is pretty solidly cleared. On the other hand, if this is an attempt to convince GF to actually do something after a flip, then why is it so aggressive?
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    Quote from osieorb18 »
    Or EtR being the actual person to instigate the play but making Tau think it was their idea.
    Explain how this works.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on The Mafia Council & Helpdesk Thread
    Quote from osieorb18 »
    I'm not going to comment on ongoing games, and will try to phrase this in general terms.

    I think that a community is well served by allowing people a chance to adjust their behavior to that community's standards when there is a significant discrepancy between the current behavior and the standards. I also think that it is ultimately the responsibility of those people to make that adjustment, and that if they do not succeed in doing so (regardless of whether they intend to; outcomes are more important than intent), it is more productive for the community to remove those people from the community than to extend indefinite second, third and Nth chances.

    The decisions of what discrepancies are too big, and how long is an acceptable period for "chances", and ultimately whether "removal" is temporary or permanent - these are up to the community leadership, in our case the council.

    It's also up to the council to decide where "chances" begin - whether they start with the council, or whether they begin with MTGS warnings/infractions before the council itself turns its attention to a matter.


    It sounds like you're suggesting that non-council members shouldn't be weighing in? I fundamentally disagree with that idea. That said, I do agree with the idea that moderation (either council-level or site-level) shouldn't be decided primarily in the court of public opinion, but that is not exactly what you just said here.
    No, that wasn't my intent. My intent was to lay out decisions that I think need to be made, and tangentially/secondarily to acknowledge the difference between expressing an opinion and making a decision.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    @Anak: People were talking about "twtbaw" which implies obvious scumminess.

    @Vaimes, tom: Can you please give more detail to your reads than "yikes"?
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Death in the Family - Day 2 - Together in Death
    @Osie why did you roleclaim?
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on The Mafia Council & Helpdesk Thread
    I'm not going to comment on ongoing games, and will try to phrase this in general terms.

    I think that a community is well served by allowing people a chance to adjust their behavior to that community's standards when there is a significant discrepancy between the current behavior and the standards. I also think that it is ultimately the responsibility of those people to make that adjustment, and that if they do not succeed in doing so (regardless of whether they intend to; outcomes are more important than intent), it is more productive for the community to remove those people from the community than to extend indefinite second, third and Nth chances.

    The decisions of what discrepancies are too big, and how long is an acceptable period for "chances", and ultimately whether "removal" is temporary or permanent - these are up to the community leadership, in our case the council.

    It's also up to the council to decide where "chances" begin - whether they start with the council, or whether they begin with MTGS warnings/infractions before the council itself turns its attention to a matter.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.