Newbie 818 (Game Over)

[Pablo Molinero]

/confirm

Hopefully Exalt won't be a crazy-person this time 'round, but somehow I don't think a miracle is happening.

[Pablo Molinero]

Vote: Deep Blue

Points for making me laugh on the avatar, so you must be trying to deflect from the fact that you're scum!

To all: get an avatar, plz. It'll make it much easier to identify who you are. I can already tell that Kichirou and Kitoari are going to give me problems.

[Pablo Molinero]

I'm on to you K bastards

What do you have against the letter k? *sniff* Also, isn't the chainsaw defense used in investigative issues?

Chainsaw defense is going after the person who is going after your buddy, so it's valid here with the "K" scumteam.

[Pablo Molinero]

unvote

I have found nothing terribly scummy about sraymonds so far and I think any legit accusations based on a L-2 wagon after 2 pages are laughable.

@Exalt: I don't think two scum would do a double lynch...seems like a dead give away to the town, no?

Exactly.

If sraymonds continues with the ridiculousness, then I would pause, but we're still working our way out of the first stages of the game. I don't see any reason why we should "wait" for him, honestly, Katy. Do some probing and hunting instead of waiting to react to something.

Vote: adamrights

for excessive use of emoticons. No, I'm not kidding.

[Pablo Molinero]

It's me nervously overcompensating because I feel like I'm playing the game wrong.

As such, I'm going to leave my vote and then just sit and observe how everything goes.

This is the first thing you've said that I don't like actually. Why are you nervous. Have you played mafia before and gotten nailed on Day 1?

To All: What is your experience with mafia? Have you played much real life/on other sites? Personally, I'm a vet of both, but much prefer this to real life, just because my 'tells' in real life are painfully obvious.

[Pablo Molinero]

Jack, that was one hell of a post and kind of hard to follow. Give me the lowdown on Sraymonds, Adamrights, and myself plz if you can. It seems to me you immediately went after the easiest target and most current topic of discussion. It's also strange that you sorta coach Sraymonds in your defense,

Not a very good defence. He should have apoligized, unvoted, and claimed newbiness IMO ...

...Again, since this was his mistake, he should have apoligized, and claimed newbie ignorance.

Since you voted him, you have some sort of inkling that he is scum. Why would you give this "proper" defense to scum, then? Makes no sense, and I have one thing for people that make no sense.

unvote, vote: Jackinthebox777

[Pablo Molinero]

I never gave him a defence, I simply wrote what he should of said.

That's the very definition of giving someone a defense!

Besides, even if he uses that defence, it doesn't change anything because he could have simply stolen it from me.

Now scum have some idea of what you're looking for in a town player. That does us no good since they ("they" being scum if you're town, your scumbuddy if you're scum) can better mask their actions.

Also, just because I went for the easiest target and current point of discussion means nothing because I also believe it to be the proper course of action. It's not my fault that it's happening right now, or that sraymonds was acting scummier then every one else.

It's convenient, and I hate going after the convenient target in newbie games.

adamrights... you are new, and I think the emoticon are very very weak as a tell as a whole, although you are pushing it pretty excessively. Still, I pause at Katy agreeing with me so quickly, latching onto a pretty weak point (being damned paranoid has kept me alive before!)

FOS: Katy

As for your 75 and 76... yeah, I think you got it, just drop any kind of setup discussion.

[Pablo Molinero]

I think this game is way above my head.

It really isn't too complicated. Your options are: play, get lynched, or replace.

[Pablo Molinero]

I agree with this. I would love to actually scumhunt, but at this point no one's been acting scummy enough to earn my vote.

Wait, are you actually saying we should sit around for someone to come along and go, "So I think we should lynch Pablo, and BY THE WAY I'M SCUM!" Activity, kids, that's how we get info. Use some votes; they're your weapon to pressure. Yes, "wagon" is a dirty word around here, but it's necessary.

So: would anyone be down with a lurker-lynch at this point?

[Pablo Molinero]

I agree with this. I would love to actually scumhunt, but at this point no one's been acting scummy enough to earn my vote.

Wait, are you actually saying we should sit around for someone to come along and go, "So I think we should lynch Pablo, and BY THE WAY I'M SCUM!" Activity, kids, that's how we get info. Use some votes; they're your weapon to pressure. Yes, "wagon" is a dirty word around here, but it's necessary.

So: would anyone be down with a lurker-lynch at this point?

I don't wait for someone to say that they're scum (sorry, it's my fault, I didn't explain myself clearly).

I try to contribute to discussion while waiting for someone to make a comment that makes my scumdar tingle.

I try to see who has been acting scummy, and I try to see who others think are scummy. By the time the lynch comes around hopefully I will have someone who has been acting scummy enough to deserve my vote.

Oh, and I'm not against lurker-lynch, but I'd like to wait a few more days first.

So ask questions. Tons of questions. Like the lurker-lynch proposal. Specific questions at people are also more likely to get them to respond.

Deep Blue, you have not said much. If you HAD to lynch someone right now, deadline tomorrow, who would it be? One name, plz.

sraymonds, do you still think Pomegranet warrants a vote? If not, who does?

Exalt

Lets try to actual scum hunt. You and Pablo are trying to avoid doing it by using retarded cases. I know pablo for sure is smarter than this from our past game together, so I am looking at him with suspicion now for even going this route

Yep, retarded cases. You gotta start somewhere, though.

Exalt

Are you suggesting lynching Pablo and setting up a possible future lynch of Katy? What is your thought process with this?

Yeah, this bothered me as well. Because it seems to imply that I am going to die via lynch or NK, and I'm not so much a fan of that. Adam needs to come back and clarify.

Exalt

This is slight rolefishing too. You also gain + scum points for this. Did you not read the first post that stated the 4 possible setups? Are you hoping for a claim or something? I don't get it.

It reads as an honest mistake to me; I think he was clarifying his 75 with his 76 and it was only like 10 mins afterward, so it was a quick catch. Anywho, we should be done with this line of conversation.

[Pablo Molinero]

Pomegranate

-Pablo, how suspicious are you of adamrights for his use of emoticons? What do you think of his claim that he's a newbie and he's just getting used to the site?

Not very. I do think one has to respect the "newbie" aspect of these games, but not so much that they sweep everything under the rug. That defense only gets you so far, so if he (or anyone) uses it later in the game I will be more skeptical.

Pomegranate

Do you have other experience as an IC? I'm wondering because, while this game is not going quickly, you seem overly happy with the idea of lurker-lynch, when we still have two weeks to go before deadline.

Yeah, this is my 3rd or 4th game as an IC, so I enjoy the role a bit. Also, look at my context and phrasing of the lurker-lynch: do you really think I'm behind the idea, or am I just posing a question?

sraymonds

No, I don't believe Pomegranate deserves my vote.

btw, you're still voting.

jack

i would love to hear the reasoning behind this. I cant think of anything i have done in this game thats suspicous.

Got something else to say? This, "Pfff, ha!" sort of response without any further pursuit of anyone reads very scummy to me.

[Pablo Molinero]

Exalt

I just realized.... Pablo did this for adamrights.... the same exact thing that he voted Jackinthebox for (aka giving him a defense and "coaching").

I don't think they're the same thing.

Exhibit A (jack): Person A does something questionable, Person B calls them out on it and says what they would do instead.

Exhibit B (adamrights): Person A does something questionable, Person B calls them out on it, Person C disagrees on Person B's read.

I mean, I'll try not to answer questions directed at exact people before they do, but I guess I didn't see it in this case and had to disagree.

adamrights

Are you for a lurker-lynch at this point?

Question with a question? Come on, would it kill you to give a straight answer? +Scum points. And no, I am very against a lurker-lynch right now: we have a good discussion going. I may feel differently close to deadline, though.

sraymonds

Just for some clarification, because I don't believe Pomegranate deserves my vote, I should unvote and just hold my vote til I decide who deserves my vote?

I mean, it ain't a big thing right now since you're the only vote on Pomegranate, but perhaps your vote should be a bit more active/useful?

[Pablo Molinero]

GODDAMNMUTHERF**KING Internet Explorer!

*ahem*

The post that I lost went a little something like this:

- Welcome MiteyMouse, feel free to add into the IC duties with your own knowledge, but try not to coach scum.

- Adamrights, were you aware that Deep Blue was answering my question when he said if he had to lynch someone it would be you?

- Deep Blue, your reacion looks genuine to me, if a little OMGUS and newbish. However, you say you want more discussion and yet the majority of your posts are 1-line long. Whatsupwitdat?

- Katy, got something original to say? Do you think that adamrights is scummy or merely misguided in his vote?

- Pomegranate, I'm not a fan of your quick "yeah," style post behind Deep Blue and Katy. Again, does adamrights deserve DB's and/or your vote?

- Exalt and everyone else: what's your read on the situation?

Bah, writing things out two times sucks. There was more detail, but whatevs.

[Pablo Molinero]

Hrm. I must have said that in the original post that got lost...

but I think both reactions on both sides are pretty genuine, ie, not scummy and it's the bit-players or people not even in the equation that I'm most suspicious of right now.

[Pablo Molinero]

Bleah, two replacements on the same "player". Hullo, Ydk.

Unvote

[Pablo Molinero]

Pablo, why did you unvote from Jackinthebox just because he was replaced? Is there something in YDK's post that made you do so? Or was it ust for the replacement?

Yeah, mostly due to replacement. I don't think replacements should get off the hook, but he made an active post and I have an odd feeling I need to step back and look at this game again.

Pablo is top 3 for me, only because of the differences he is playing in this game compared to the last one I was in with him. He also has defended adamrights which threw me off a bit. He claimed to not see it the same way, but its still there.

Heh, while it is true that I have not stepped up and tried to grab this game by the horns (yet!) like I usually do when I'm town, I am in the last 3 days of my internship/CoOp at NASA, so I am dying to get my projects/papers finished. I really shouldn't be posting here right now!

Anywho, I will definitely be back in the game consistently after the weekend, since I'll be back home for a month before school starts back up.

[Pablo Molinero]

Still here, still writing papers (ugh), still lurking.

Same question, I'll give my answer later: How do people feel about a lurker-lynch NOW?

[Pablo Molinero]

Heh, wow.

Unvote, Vote: Kirbyoshi

Finishing up my paper. Hopefully I can post later today and explain, but DAMN has Kirbyoshi rocketed to my #1. In the meantime, think about it yourselves.

[Pablo Molinero]

I just think it's very interesting that Pablo's mindset is that getting rid of an obvious mobster is a scummy thing to do. Could it be that Pablo is the other scum?

I do know that this is not how pablo played as town in a past game with him. At the moment he is actively lurking, making one liner posts, and then voting without reason.

This doesn't look very pro-town to me.

Yeah, but I have explained my situation many times over to you people. I JUST finished my final research paper and (with my boss out of town and this being my last day of work) I can get back to playing starting... now.

Anyways, my knee-jerk reaction to Kirbyoshi is due to the tone and style of his vote-post, not so much the person he voted for (although I can legit see where you're coming up with the idea of me busting out the "chainsaw defense". I assure you, this is not the case.) Let's do a breakdown of all the things I don't like in one little post:

Kirbyoshi

Not only is adamrights not really contributing anything

Exalt just went on a rant about many people not contributing anything and I was inclined to agree. Citing people for recent inactivity/ineffectiveness would lynch 2/3rds of the whole town!

Kirbyoshi

he's probably the most "active" player that does not have a vote on anyone yet.

Timidity on votes is never a scummy thing, in my experience. If scum does not vote to divert attention away from themselves, then what are they gonna do? Just roll over and die? Not a valid point, imo.

Kirbyoshi

This could be for a number of reasons, but I'm leaning toward the option that he and his scumbuddy haven't figured out a target yet.

...really? Scum not figuring out a target? In a newbie game, there's always someone to get an easy lynch on Day 1 based on newbie behavior. In this case, if you want examples, I could easily see scum tearing apart Deep Blue and/or sraymonds/you.

Kirbyoshi

Let's get rid of him already, since most of us agree that he's the most suspicious.

Wow. This is a disaster of a sentence. Appealing to the majority and trying to hasten the lynch all in one breath. Yeah, and it's also jumping on the easiest target that's underneath the most fire right now. 3rd vote and all. And to top it all off, your predecessor in sraymonds was a very lurking-heavy (never a good thing) player that seemed intimidated by the game. Seems like it could be very easily be a newbie-scum scared off since he didn't know how to "scumhunt" as scum.

And then your follow-up (Kirbyoshi)

I just think it's very interesting that Pablo's mindset is that getting rid of an obvious mobster is a scummy thing to do. Could it be that Pablo is the other scum?

Totally obvious. That's why he had a whole 2 votes on his so far. I like how you just spray suspicion on me here for "defending" someone even when it's all an offensive post (yeah, yeah, 'chainsaw defense', bite me) on my side.

------

Oddly enough, adamrights, while he seemed genuine in the Deep Blue exchange, has increased on my scumdar significantly since then. It seems that he's fishing for something, anything, to stick in the last 2 pages and it does not sit well with me. Statements like:

adam

I definitely think between Exalt, DB and Pom there is a scum

Looks like he's fishing around for something anyone can get behind by listing a lot of names. While I have a definite #1 right now with my vote, I would be all right with an adamrights lynch today if push comes to shove on the deadline.

Alright, time for a more complete re-read.

[Pablo Molinero]

Cute, I like that you assume it was

only

because of the 3rd-voter theory, despite EXALT saying that instead of me. Way to jump to conclusions and put words in my mouth.

[Pablo Molinero]

No, I don't think you've been terribly pro-town since you started, considering you have a whole 9 posts to your name and none of them really game-shattering.

[Pablo Molinero]

Erm... sure? There you go, I conceded a point. Well done.

But it's not exactly pro-town if you make YOURSELF the suspect... you are one terribly confusing person.

[Pablo Molinero]

Reread post:

-------------------

I’m not sure why I didn’t notice it before, but Pom on page 4 is looks very suspect in my opinion. For one, she gives the whole awful:

I agree with this. I would love to actually scumhunt, but at this point no one's been acting scummy enough to earn my vote.

As an excuse for not really trying to scumhunt, and then right afterwards jumps as the 3rd person on the Jack-wagon, parroting my point of “giving sray a defense in order to avoid suspicion in the future” and OMGUS reaction to me.

Again with adam, saying,

I was just discussing for the sake of discussion. Why not?

On the case of game/role speculation. Never a good thing to be flippant about. And then he goes on to respond to my lurker-lynch question with “Are you for a lurker-lynch at this point?”… The more I look at that the less I like it. Don’t get sassy with me! I want answers!

Pom does not seem terribly confident, unvoting right after the 3rd-voter theory was discussed. Blatant attempt trying to remove suspicion from yourself. Townie or scummy, I don’t know, but I don’t like it.

Pom’s reaction to YDK’s case is an interesting one, in that it was mildly defensive but “understanding” of YDK’s thoughts: mostly short and non-argumentative.

I was saying somewhere that I thought the adam/DeepBlue exchange was pretty genuine, but then adam goes and says this:

I jumped on Deep Blue mainly to see his reactions, and so I can't remember if I knew he was responding or not to a question, but it didn't really matter to me because my point was to see how he would respond.

The backtracking, changing his reasoning to “fishing for a reaction” because other people (Katy, Pom) had not liked his first reaction is incredibly suspicious, imo.

-------------------

tl;dr: adam and Pom ain't looking so hot from the reread. #2 and 3 for me.

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh... wow. Role-speculation ahoy. Are you TRYING to get me killed, Kirbyoshi?! If I could vote you twice, I would. Role speculation shows that you have some sort of inside knowledge. There's a 50/50 chance we have a goon/RB setup and a 50/50 chance out of

that

where we have a full game of doc/cop/goon/RB. Well done. Inside knowledge = scum.

Also, way to back off your suspicion of me once you saw I can put together a coherent sentence.

--------------

As to ANYONE that is saying I am pushing a lurker-lynch, note some things. Never once do I place a vote on someone because they are lurking. I asked them as

questions

; I was not saying, “Hey, lets lynch the greatest lurker”. I responded to my own question the first time after adam game me some lip, “

And no, I am very against a lurker-lynch right now: we have a good discussion going.

I may feel differently close to deadline, though.” Guess what? Discussion has picked up again and I’m fine with my non-lurker vote. So, to anyone that made that statement of me pushing a lurker lynch (YDK, Exalt, Kirbyoshi). Way to read the thread and try to manufacture suspicion against me.

--------------

Ah, it is good to be back in the game.

[Pablo Molinero]

Sorry about the influx of long posts, town, I'll try and keep it a little more concise from now on. There's just been so much to say...

[Pablo Molinero]

Why would I be trying to get you killed by my role-speculating?

Calling me cop and Exalt doctor... you're immediately assuming a setup that only has a 25% chance of happening and it instantly calls out who the night-targets should be. I'm sure Exalt won't appreciate this either.

Is it because if you get people to jump on me, I'll turn up town? If you don't think I'm scum, take your vote off of me.

... ... ...When did I ever say I didn't think you were scum? Nope. Still voting to lynch you.

And another thing, if you are "completely against" a lurker lynch, then why did you push the issue more than once? You're back to my #3, PM.

I asked the 2nd time to gauge people's reactions and see if stances have shifted (and to remain active since I was going through my hell-week). I've been asking questions all game. Not only that I have explicitly said I am against the idea.

[Pablo Molinero]

Yeah, the "if I die, people lynching me are scum!" idea is never a good one. I remember that Exalt subscribed to that idea in our previous game until I beat some sense into him. If you are townie and you die, you place the town one step closer to the loss. Period.

And, yeah the role-talk is different in both cases, and bad in both cases.

[Pablo Molinero]

I see I’ve taken two FoS’s from Kirby and adam, and yet no vote. Isn’t that quaint. Kirby, your breakdown of my posts on 242 is laughable. You show that I had a weak reason to vote adam (for emoticons), and then can’t figure it out when I FoS Katy for agreeing with me on the weak reason (or so I thought at the time, Katy has since recanted and I remain mildly suspicious of her). What, does 2+2=fish in your world? Scumhunting, I was doing it.

This scumpairing idea Kirby/Pom/Exalt have in their heads, and I say this in EVERY game I am in, is pretty much total crap at least on Day 1. Once we have some flips, then you can go after scumpairs legitimately. Otherwise, it is just baseless speculation that I have seen before used to lynch a townie; it is a very bad route to go down. Not only that, but both me and adam have shown considerable suspicion of one another, but trying to push a lynch when you should know NO ONE’s alignment is illogical and scummy.

That said, Adam, you did yourself a few favors with 249. You got to break down the crap argument against me before I could get to it. Yes, I was not ever advocating a lurker lynch; at least someone reads my posts. I get the same vibe from you, pal, in your words: “soft buddy-up”. You agree with me on some things and disagree on others. Enough so that I don’t think you’re the right lynch at all, now.

Personally, I don’t see why more people don’t think that Kirby outright stating what he thinks is the setup is a complete disaster. It shows prior knowledge of the setup and while he backpedaled on it (of course he did!), his words are still out there in all their complete disaster.

You want me to contribute something? Ok, here it is...
adam is a Goon, and DB is a roleblocker (the lurking tells me that he has an extreme aversion to being lynched), which means we (town) have to have a role that he can block. Is Pablo a cop? Then he will investigate me tonight and get off my back. I have nothing to hide. Is Exalt a doctor? Then he can protect someone who needs to be protected (not necessarily me, but maybe Pom or Katy).

On top of role speculation: RBs and goons do not play any different in my experience, so it appears Kirby is just making crap up on the spot to make an argument. Yeah, that’s not scummy at all.

Pom better put up something significant, because so far I have been underwhelmed by her activity in the past days when the pressure is on for us to get somewhere.

Is DB still playing? Does he warrant a prod/replace at this point?

[Pablo Molinero]

(Quotes from Kirby)

Pablo has been playing very abrasively, especially since I joined the game. I did some metagame research and found his previous game where he did basically the same thing: he played well, until his name was mentioned, then he basically blew up and called everyone idiots. He ended up being scum.

Link plz. I want to see what in the world you're talking about.

Pablo: Out of these three, your reaction is the scummiest. You jumped all over me, voted for me, and you still just won't let it go. You seem to take pleasure in making others look like fools, and if people look like fools, a valid suspicion can be simply dismissed with a "haha n00b."

Kirby... god as much as I hate to say it, your reactions (like that above) to the accusations read very newb-town to me. I have had experienced ICs tunneling on me before and it was incredibly frustrating and felt very scummy on their part; i.e. what you're doing here.

On the other hand, you have to see it from my point of view: I see someone do one of the most scummy things IMO, and if I let them off the hook easily and you end up being scum, I would have to throw myself out of a damn window from the embarrassment. You're trending in the right direction, though, so there may be hope for you yet.

Question: When you made your initial posts of role-guessing, what did you think were the setup rules?

---

Right now, Pom constant avoiding, "I'll do it later, I'll do it later... I'll do it later" and parroting of simple points is a classic sign of scum trying to piece something together and failing. Something that I am guilty of all the time as scum: being unsure, not taking strong points, and passing it off as inactivity. Don't like it one bit and instead of posting when called out, Pom gave another "I'm working on it".

So, for Exalt: Pom and Kirby right now.

[Pablo Molinero]

My blowup in that game was because of the lack of activity making it impossible to make any kind of case. Here, I am both town and don't have the problem with our activity. And the "blowing up and calling everyone idiots" is an outright lie; that kind of thing is typically more of a town-tell than anything for me.

[Pablo Molinero]

When someone looks only at one person for an extended period of time and rides them come hell or high water. Some people use it as a "legit" tactic, but I think it's mostly crap; you gotta look at the big picture even when pressuring one person, something I think I have failed to do recently.

Deadline is soon, guys, we need people in here on the double.

[Pablo Molinero]

Damn. Adam, I hope if you are town, you're not a VT pulling some bluff to keep yourself alive.

Anywho, this leaves us with a Kirby lynch that I'm not too high on anymore (suprise, I know!) or a different target. Unlike other newb games where I wouldn't even consider it at this point, I think we have enough people active and enough for a majority that we could swing something. Both Raskol (replacing a super-lame DB) and Pom have been mildly underwhelming in the past few pages, enough so I would be fine getting rid of them and thinking we have a decent chance in hitting scum there.

unvote

...for now.

Yeah, I'm in a few other games right now. I'm modding a game, too so that's what I left to check up on.

[Pablo Molinero]

I think Raskol has been pretty solid in the last page (and it looks like he's had the same thought-progression as myself regarding Kirby). I would be down for getting rid of some of the unknowns like Mitey or Exalt. Exalt typically is loud, abrasive, and gung-ho about who he wants to take down and yet in the past day or two where he explicity says he only has a little time left to be active in this game, he's been mostly quiet with the occasional bitter quip about the recent developments.

And I have no read on Mitey. Blah. That's never good. Re-read ahoy.

[Pablo Molinero]

Exalt

I don't think you will die because I believe we have a doc

Why? You know 1 thing: there is a cop. There should be no reason for you to think there is a doc unless you know there is a goon/RB, i.e. you are scum. Yay, more role talk to drive Pablo goddamn insane!

Check the vote hoppers on the next Day as, switching near a deadline is a Scum tell...and this ganging up does not look good for you boys!

I am willing to go for this gamble, because frankly this doesn't sound like a townie thing to say being an IC. You know better.

And yet you said just a few moments ago...

I am willing to follow you with whatever vote you want us to have, even if that meant my own, but what I hope is that you have enough deduction skills to really find scum at this point...

Delicious contradictions. I don't have the best read on you this game Exalt, but you feel a bit 'off' from when I played last time with you. Paired with those two recent gaffes of yours and you jumping onto the easy lynch/bandwagon right now of MM, you look like a prime candidate.

Vote: Exalt

[Pablo Molinero]

Huh. You suppose they tried a double RB/kill on our cop? Either way, I wanna see if he got a result or not.

[Pablo Molinero]

Huh. You suppose they tried a double RB/kill on our cop? Either way, I wanna see if he got a result or not.

This seems a bit out of character for you Pablo. Wasn't it pretty obvious that they tried a double RB/kill on me…you don’t seem like the confused kind, is this intentional?

I am actually less suspicious of Exalt because the doc is not dead.

Pom, you do not sit well with me – I think you got away with not getting lynched yesterday, and that’s why you’re coming out strong, posting.

@everyone: Who are your top two suspects?

I was certainly not expecting a no-kill. Either you were gonna be RBed and there was going to be another kill OR you were going to be killed straight-up. I never have actually been in a game where a successful doc-save has happened.

After I'm done with some Rock Band, I'll sit down and look at this game again. This Day 2 has already started out plenty interesting.

[Pablo Molinero]

I don't like so much the idea of a mass-claim yet, but what do you guys think of a hypo-doc situation?

This is where EVERYONE in the game claims who they 'saved' in the night. Somewhere in there, the real doc will give his/her real save last night. This is so if the doc is lynched/NKed, the information of who they saved does not die with them. This is done without the doc outright revealing themselves right now. Thoughts? (...As I reread.)

[Pablo Molinero]

Okay, after doing a reread of the end of Day 1 and what we have so far for Day 2, I'm torn:

On one side, I side with Exalt's recent logic. Obviously he shouldn't have really mentioned it in the first place, but if he has a good clue as to who the doc is (and he seems pretty damn sure) AND he was scum, he would have killed them last night, right? Instead, he hinted at the fact, but nothing more. Raskol torches him hard on this as he should, but I ask Raskol: do you think this is scummy play or just careless town play?

On the other side, I do not side with Exalt's demeanor. He's been much more subdued in this game, which is frankly not like him at all when I've seen his as town.

Anyways: HYPO-DOC, YAY OR NAY?

[Pablo Molinero]

adam, I think you are worng. I find it very hard to believe that the scum would be dumb enough to try to both RB and kill you when they can just RB you and pick off people til they find the doc. I think it's more likely that the doc out-guessed the scum, and if we had all the information right now, we could have up to 3 confirmed townies out of 8 people. Obviously I don't want this information known right now, but I don't want to run the risk of losing that information should the doc get killed before revealing who he/she saved. I defy you to say that is scummy.

I wanted to wait for a while to say it so I could see if anyone thought it was a good idea (which would be a scumtell).

Why would possibly gaining information on a confirmed townie at a later date be a scummy idea?

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh hell, yeah I get it. Scum know who they tried to kill, ergo they will just pick out the person (doc) that said they saved the person the scum tried to kill. I be dumb.

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh, Kirby, I'm enjoying this big slice of sweet, delicious irony cake you served up. Jumping on me for role speculation after you did the

same thing

yesterday? Not only the same thing, but your was worse! My 'role speculation' today has a a purpose: to cut down on our number of suspects from 8 to 5, yours was random and inane. Also: why are you not going after Raskol, who has entertained the claim idea and been more vocal about it than me? A whole lot of illogical there and illogical play is just a slight step away from scummy play.

I'm on the fence about a mass-claim.

On one hand our doc and cop would be the next to go and Katy does raise a great point: if we can lynch the RB today, then we have the game almost in the bag with a live cop and doc. On the other hand, if we out the cop, doc, and protected innocent we have better odds as a whole in hitting scum.

8 players today:
Today with no claim: 2/7 (29%) chance of hitting scum.
Today with claim: 2/5 (40%) chance of hitting scum.

6 players tomorrow:
Tomorrow with no claim: 2/5 (40%) chance of hitting scum.
Tomorrow with claim: 2/4 (50%) chance of hitting scum.

What do you all think? We see about a 10% increase in both today AND tomorrow if we claim. Is that worth it? I'm leaning towards "yes", but I'm not quite sure yet.

Needless to day, if for some bizarre reason our doc saved adam, he/she should NOT come out at all.

It isn't worth it at that point.

Time to look over today yet again. I want a opinion from YDK now that he realizes the game has started up. He seems to be in a perfect lurker position pretty much since he started.

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh, Kirby, I'm enjoying this big slice of sweet, delicious irony cake you served up.

1) This game is not about irony. At the time of my mistake, I was about as n00by as you can get. You were the one who brought it up that it is a bad idea, and now you're the one doing it? You admitted earlier that it was scummy, yet now you're going back on your convictions.

Also: why are you not going after Raskol, who has entertained the claim idea and been more vocal about it than me?

2) Raskol has pretty much taken charge, which is interesting since he's not vetting this game. He's been more vocal about EVERYTHING than EVERYBODY. @Raskol: Are you on any other mafia sites?

8 players today:
Today with no claim: 2/7 (29%) chance of hitting scum.
Today with claim: 2/5 (40%) chance of hitting scum.

6 players tomorrow:
Tomorrow with no claim: 2/5 (40%) chance of hitting scum.
Tomorrow with claim: 2/4 (50%) chance of hitting scum.

3) Doesn't this assume we won't hit scum toDay, which is the whole reason behind a massclaim?

What do you all think? We see about a 10% increase in both today AND tomorrow if we claim. Is that worth it?

4) I don't think so. If we don't hit scum toDay or toMorrow, that means cop and doc are gone, and both scum are still in. I don't see that as a good trade-off for town. The odds are still not even 50% with a claim toDay, and right at 50% toMorrow. When the odds get better, I might be more open to a massclaim, but for right now, let's keep it as it is.

1) "This game is not about irony". I nearly fell apart laughing there. Someone explain a joke to this guy. As for the rest, when you brought up roles, there was NOTHING to gain from it. That's why it was scummy. Now, as I just explained through the percentage analysis, we stand to gain something since we have RESULTS (in the form of a doc-save). Get it?

2) Wait, so being vocal about something you still think is a bad idea means it's okay for him to do it, but not me. Hullo, illogical double-standard.

3) Yes, the whole reason around the mass claim is to help us catch scum, but it does not guarantee we will hit scum. My percentages are of a worst-case scenario. Come on, you're nitpicking stupid things and you know it.

4) Our cop is worthless until we get rid of the RB and do you think the doc has already outguessed the scum once, but I don't know if he/she can do it again. I would love for them to continue to help, but realistically, I'm not sure how much more help our PRs will be.

[Pablo Molinero]

I would love for them to continue to help, but realistically, I'm not sure how much more help our PRs will be.

Are you saying they're as powerless as vanillas now, since it's obviously impossible for us to hit the RB toDay?

Of course not. Put your strawman arguments away. There's a chance our PRs will become useful again, but right now: odds are that we will

not

get another doc-save and the odds say we will

not

kill the RB today. Simple as that.

I'd rather take the sure thing (improving our odds from 2/7 to 2/5) than the gamble (1/7 lynching the RB). Raskol has said the same damn thing on this page: if we let it go to tomorrow, we gamble again and we risk losing the save-info from today.

Also, it'd be cool if the conversation could contain more than 3 people, btw, when 8 are playing.

Adam: I'm asking you specifically. After seeing the numbers, what do you think of the doc coming out?

[Pablo Molinero]

Heh. You still have not answered the question of how you thought Raskol was doc

originally

. Those instances you cited (Raskol grilling you) came AFTER you initially said "I think we have a doc". I straight up don't believe your above posts.

Your little blow-up on what you think is "retarded play" does not help us, the names you're throwing about it's childish and stupid, and seems a bit forced, actually. Do you not understand we have improved our odds significantly? Are you that blind? You're the only one that does not seem to 'get' it and I'm ready to vote for you a second time once Raskol reveals who he saved.

And I'm also ready for the game to move beyond this role-fiasco and concentrate on who is freakin' scum!

[Pablo Molinero]

You're the only one that does not seem to 'get' it and I'm ready to vote for you a second time once Raskol reveals who he saved.

I don't get it either, am I scum?

Probably.

[Pablo Molinero]

You've been the most abrasive person in this game so far, quite possibly.

Only to you, pal.

Also, why the reaction so quick to something I said to Exalt? Busting out the chainsaw for him?

Policy lynch ftw again, after it failed the last time? I don't get it either, am I scum?

...do you know what policy lynch means? And if you're talking about my Exalt-vote at the end of Day 1, that was far from a policy-lynch.

Oh, and let's have a look at the people who lynched Mitey yesterday: adam, Raskol, Exalt, and Kirby. Two of them are our PRs and I'd be willing to bet that at least one scum was helping it along: you (Kirby) and/or Exalt. Pair that with the fact that Exalt was the dreaded third-vote there (an underwhelmingly-justified one, at that) and you have a suspect.

[Pablo Molinero]

Heh. This one is a no-brainer for me. I've already explained myself.

Vote: Exalt

Also of note: Katy killed me Night 1 as mafia in a previous newbie game we played together. Just sayin'.

[Pablo Molinero]

Adam, your result?

Time to read over everyone's interactions with Exalt.

[Pablo Molinero]

In the words of an old room-mate of mine. Dooooope. Looks like I was right about that N1 kill thing, eh?

Vote: Katy

[Pablo Molinero]

Yeah, this was the quickest, smoothest newbie game I've been in. A pleasure to play, this game got my attention and is definitely in my fave games I've played so far.

Katy and Exalt as the scum pair. Man. Katy played really well to blend in (which had me nice and paranoid considering our last game together), as did Exalt up until his doc-slip up. You were exactly right in what you said in the quick topic, Exalt. I was expecting you to be loud, abrasive, and gung-ho once again, so you sitting back a bit more threw me for a loop.

Great save, of course, Raskol. I like living! You really drove home Day 2 and I'm glad you agreed with me on the doc/save claim, because that ended up being huge.

Kirby, hopefully there are no hard feelings with my *ahem* "abrasive" attitude toward you. You actually pushed back at me in the way that made me think you town, though, so that's good. But the initial statements of guessing me as cop and exalt as doc were plenty head-scratching (kinda weird how that worked out with a cop and doc in the game, even though you were just vanilla). Hopefully you can learn from the role-talk experience, because I know many, many people on this site will use that kind of thing to torch you. You all played a good game, though. I'm used to 'weak-links' being picked off Days 1 and 2, but here the town was pretty solid and definitely helped push us toward the win.

And thanks for modding, hohum.