Mini 745 - Moving Day Mafia (GAME OVER!)
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
vote: ac1983fan
i don't get it. you are suspicious of someone for voting with one piece of evidence. are you FoSing anyone else for this?
dejkha: if you are town, please note you are simply being stubborn and that is not going to help.
to all: if you are using quotes, please get the tags right. i am hella confused.
erratus: i think you are misunderstanding what dej said about you knowing who town is. it's not circular logic. you are missing the wordif. it could apply to any one of us.if you are scum then you know who town is.its fact.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
dej: i interpreted this as you being stubborn. simple stubborness is not pro town. its more pro playground.dejkha wrote:
That doesn't disproved what I said. It still stands.Erratus Apathos wrote: How exactly is an L-4 random vote the path to victory for scum? If I'm scum and ZEEnon is town, I would need to convince four players to vote for him,without evidence against him, to get a mislynch. Some path to victory that is.
zeenon: whatisyour deal?
q21: you don't see your vote being a bit hypocritical?
QFTEA wrote:Wagons don't lead to mislynches. Faulty evidence and crap logic lead to mislynches. Scum will of course try to combine the two, but wagoning by itself won't get the job done.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WIFOM defense.ac1983fan wrote: You are as far off as possible with this post. I am not plonky's scumbuddy, and I have no clue as to who is town and who is not... I haven't played mafia in a long time, but I know that jumping to vote people quickly has won me games as scum and lost me games as town, so I'm trying to play carefully in terms of voting. In fact, I won my first game as scum because of basically quickly voting to lynch people. You're drawing too many assumptions from one post, I think.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
its textbook. "i am not plonky's scumbuddy" is a meaningless statement. statements such as that are a waste of space. how you would or would not actac1983fan wrote:
How so?don_johnson wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WIFOM defense.ac1983fan wrote: You are as far off as possible with this post. I am not plonky's scumbuddy, and I have no clue as to who is town and who is not...I haven't played mafia in a long time, but I know that jumping to vote people quickly has won me games as scum and lost me games as town, so I'm trying to play carefully in terms of voting.In fact, I won my first game as scum because of basically quickly voting to lynch people. You're drawing too many assumptions from one post, I think.ifyou were mafiaiswifom. don't get me wrong, the "i want to be careful with my vote" is a reasonable pont to make, but venturing into "if i were scum" territory is unproductive. and that appears(to me) what you have done here.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
depends on how you look at it. sure they know who they are, but in order to win they need to find convenient excuses not to find each other. you are having a hard time, yet you FoS me. my point is that in the entire thread, ac1983fan finds nobody suspicious. nobody. you buy that?Tovarish wrote:Forgive ac for not voting at every random trun of events. I can't blame him for not finding scum, I'm having a hard time too. A lot of the earlier part of the game seems to be more of a debate about theory rather than actual scumhunting- or maybe all this is just going over my head- btu your post makes very little sense, and is trying to reinforce a serious logical fallacy.The scum can always find scum, they know who they are
FOS- Don Johnson.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i think its interesting how you completely overlook this next quote >dejkha wrote:I also think its interesting how you tried to make it look like he said he "can't find scum" when he actually said "nobody really seems too suspicious to [him]". Nice try, trying to play around with what he said though.
^^ this statement was made to clarify my thoughts on ac1983fan. did you just miss this, or is there a reason you ignore it?don_johnson wrote: my point is that in the entire thread, ac1983fan finds nobody suspicious. nobody. you buy that?
^^ is what he said. do i need to clarify my point again? page 6 and "nobody seems suspicious". "nobody".ac1983fan wrote:Nobody really seems too suspicious to me.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
dejkha: good point, but it does not alleviate my suspicion of ac, and so my vote will stay for now.
there is much wrong with the above quote. first, ac had been, until this time a big proponent for "careful" voting.(i am paraphrasing here). they seemed to be preaching that votes should be well reasoned. however, two posts after FoSing jazz they vote, pretty contradictory to what they initially touted(in my eyes). my vote on them is not solely based on their inability to find others "too suspicious" but more based on their general behavior. i agree that votes should not be cast willy-nilly, but voting is a necessary cog in the wheels of this game. note also, that ac states that there are "much better" reasons to be voting zeenon, but is not voting zeenon, nor explaining this statement at all.ac1983fan wrote:vote: jazzmyn
You contribute almost nothing to the discussion, and then make a vote for a silly reason, and no acknowlegement of what is really going on, claiming that you think we are still in the joke vote stage, where anyone who had actually read the thread would know that was not true. This was my initial assesment, which you proved with your response to my & q21's questions... There are much better reasons to be voting for zeenon other than his unorthodox posting style.
do you find tovarish suspicious for twisting my words?
i did not mention anything in regards to voting when i called ac out.tov wrote:Forgive ac for not voting at every random trun of events.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
again, i never called you out for not voting. we differ in opinion on my contributions. your vote seems more omgus than anything else. sorry about your aunt, but you are making a sweeping generalization of a statement i directed to you in order to "motivate" you. notice the "try harder" on the end of my initial vote. anyways.ac1983fan wrote: Don, you've contributed very little in the game, and then you come back into the game with a completely ridiculous accusation, that anyone who cannot find scum is scum.You want me to vote for who I find suspicious?fine.
i am confused by this. you said there were reasons to VOTE zeenon. you are the one making a distinction between votes and suspicions in order to defend yourself. now they become conveniently interchangeable?ac1983fan wrote:She had valid reasons to be suspicious of zee, so I unvoted my vote on her.
The reasons to be suspicious of zee are because mostly of his OMGUS vote for EA where he claimed that he didn't need to provide reasons for his vote.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
who called your vote OMGUS?ac1983fan wrote:
My wording was that I didn't find anybody too suspicious.My current vote is not OMGUS, it's because you found my saying that to make me scum. Unless your vote is based off of anything but that and my fosing of plonky, then please, explain these.
for my main suspicions of you see post 134. it is not a terribly strong case, and i am probably not the best at presenting cases, myself, but do you honestly feel that my vote is not warranted? you don't think that your actions and posts are the least bit suspicious? has your play been that flawless?
your logic isn't terrible, but it seems inconsistent. you couldn't find anyone "too" suspicious until i tossed a serious vote in your direction. you support people voting for who they think is suspicious, but become suspicious of them if they voteyou?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
ac1983fan wrote:She had valid reasons to be suspicious of zee, so I unvoted my vote on her.
The reasons to be suspicious of zee are because mostly of his OMGUS vote for EA where he claimed that he didn't need to provide reasons for his vote.
What are you saying? I can't even understand this... suspicious are better reasons to vote Zee than random votes... I really don't know what you're questioning here.[/quote]dj wrote: i am confused by this. you said there were reasons to VOTE zeenon. you are the one making a distinction between votes and suspicions in order to defend yourself. now they become conveniently interchangeable?
did jazz have valid reasons for voting zee or not? i thought she said it was random... she did. then she came up with suspicions after the fact. you said you weren't voting people because noone was "too" suspicious, yet you clear jazz's "random" vote because she has "valid" suspicions. i just don't get it. are you guys scumbuddies?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i explained this.Zer0ph34r wrote:ZEEnon, could you please stop with the spaces between your sentences? It gets difficult to read when it is spaced like that. Post like a normal person.
don_johnson, if you think he's scum, why tell him to look for scum harder? he wouldn't need to, if he is.
^^ was posted to clarify. you are now regurgitating discussion. dej pointed to the flaw in the statement and it was acknowledged and discussed. have you not been reading or is this just a lame attempt to look as though you are contributing?dj wrote: my point is that in the entire thread, ac1983fan finds nobody suspicious. nobody. you buy that?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
dej: do you have any thoughts on ac's reaction to my vote? also, what are your thoughts on Jazz? i understand her rl restriction which seems to affect her activity, but are you satisfied with her posts? in short, i am wondering if you see any validity in my suspicions of these two players.dejkha wrote:
Not true. He's the most suspicious to me right now and I'm the only one voting him, so that's where I'm placing my vote at the moment. If he already had votes on him, I'd probably hold off a little while.q21 wrote:When I read this I find it a little contradictory. You claim not to be "too suspicious" of anyone, but the way to address, accuse and then vote don looks to me like you do, in fact, find him to be "too suspicious". True, not true?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
sorry. i don't think i have broached the subject of lynching ac1983fan over my initial comment. i would unvote, but i am not satisfied with their seeming abandonment of the obvious flaw in Jazzmyn's reasoning. i don't really see how i am "rushing" a lynch here.Tovarish wrote:I'll ask again k7, why os your spideysense tingling and why is everybody scummy, but not?
Also, I think Herodotus is looking at a coincidence. Random votes are, after all, random.
At the moment, killa seven seens the scummiest to mevote- killa sevenfor a seeming abandonment of the game, and total disregard for evidence with donjohnsom following quickly behind. Not for DJ's lack of content, I fully realize that my posting has been similarly sparse, but for his incredibly flawed logic that f yuopu can't find scum you are. If anything that seems to run counter to the tried and true mantra that long days are good for the town, smells like he's wanting to rush a lynch. [/b]
why not? saying a vote is random and then backing it up with reasoning is a little off kilter. jazz obviously has rl time constraints which affect her posting, but i don't see why this should alleviate suspicion.ac1983fan wrote:My not thinking anyone is too suspicious has nothing to do really with my interactions with jazzmyn.
i understand the flaw in my original statement, but it was meant to be motivational. i would like ac to address this.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
do you still feel justified in your vote on me?ac1983fan wrote:
I get what you're saying. While jazz did initially say it was a random vote, she has actual suspicions towards zeenon anyway. I unvoted because I no longer felt comfortable with voting for jazzmyn. However, she's definitely not off my scumdar.don_johnson wrote:
why not? saying a vote is random and then backing it up with reasoning is a little off kilter. jazz obviously has rl time constraints which affect her posting, but i don't see why this should alleviate suspicion.ac1983fan wrote:My not thinking anyone is too suspicious has nothing to do really with my interactions with jazzmyn.
i understand the flaw in my original statement, but it was meant to be motivational. i would like ac to address this.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
you are leaving out the end of the quote in which i said, "try harder." i thought i did explain the statement. scum are put to the task of conveniently finding excuses not to vote each other. yes, bussing happens, but i would say more often than not that scum actively try to avoid each other on day 1. also, they are faced with the task of proving someone scum, who isn't scum, and so often they will try to stay on the outskirts of arguments and remain non committal. your brief foray into the activity and subsequent "nobody seems to suspicious," comment seemed suspicious to me. i voted, and i gave you an out to said vote. i.e. "try harder". not sure how much more i can explain my statement. scum can't find scum because they know who the scum are. thus they don't need to look. you can slice the statement many ways. tov's interpretation pointed out the flaws in the statement which is why i explained it in the first place.ac1983fan wrote:
Well, you still really haven't fully explained your statement: "If you can't find scum, you are scum". You claim that it was meant to be motivational; how could that have possibly been taken as motivational?don_johnson wrote:
do you still feel justified in your vote on me?ac1983fan wrote:
I get what you're saying. While jazz did initially say it was a random vote, she has actual suspicions towards zeenon anyway. I unvoted because I no longer felt comfortable with voting for jazzmyn. However, she's definitely not off my scumdar.don_johnson wrote:
why not? saying a vote is random and then backing it up with reasoning is a little off kilter. jazz obviously has rl time constraints which affect her posting, but i don't see why this should alleviate suspicion.ac1983fan wrote:My not thinking anyone is too suspicious has nothing to do really with my interactions with jazzmyn.
i understand the flaw in my original statement, but it was meant to be motivational. i would like ac to address this.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
unvote
q: i don't think i made a dangerous assumption. what scum actively try to do and what they end up doing are two different things, but i think i see your point.
though i would like K7 to post, i cannot support a policy lynch at this time. i would choose it over a no lynch, but otherwise i feel it would do no good. if K7 chooses not to post, i would suggest requesting a replacement before following through on a policy lynch.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
not to cast wily aspersions, but just because K7q21 wrote:I understand Herodotus. For K-7 things like this:
Is possible, for for now I give him the benefit of the doubt.killa seven wrote:
didnt i JUst win a game where i outed you as the last scum.don_johnson wrote:vote: killa seven
they're always scum.
SMH at the hate vote.]thinkshe outed me in that game doesn't mean he did. if you are interested, read the game he is referring to. i replaced in on day 3 with scum buddy number two at L-2, and scum buddy number one having been lynched day 1, and for some reason, no nightkill had been sent in night one by the player i was replacing. no offense, K7, but i came in against all odds. saying, "don't lynch me now because i might be helpful later on," may not be the best route for you here.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
K7: if you are "nothing special", you should be putting yourself out there. by lurking you force other townies,who may actually be something special, to put themselves in harm's way. discussion is protown, but everyone knows that by talking alot you can open yourself to being the victim of a mislynch. i would prefer some analysis from you as opposed to these short posts and "i don't care" attitude. though i agree with q21, the wifom of these statements are only increasing your risk of being lynched on policy. policy lynch bandwagons leave little to go on day 2, so continuing with this behavior is horribly anti town. so why do you persist?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
K7: i haven't yet seen a good case for a policy lynch, but you are coming seriously close.
AC: can you explain the timing discrepancy of your threat?
Zeenon: please explain "wishy-washy"?
tov: didn't understand this >>
layman's terms, please?That said, AC's voting patterns do give me pause, but until I see further evidence to the contrary I'm going to chalk his patterns up to general eagerness- towards a kind of self fufilling prophecy.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
^^^^^ wifom. vanilla is the easiest claim for scum to fake.ac1983fan wrote:
I don't see you saying anything to anyone else voting for him. I'm pretty sure most of them think that he is town,q21 wrote:You see, as soon as you put "He's probably town" no matter what you say after that, if you still want to lynch him I find it scummy.since scum knows claiming vanilla will likely not save them.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i am getting tired of this. K7 is asking us to lynch him. i think we should oblige.Herodotus wrote:Because the order and timing of votes on a wagon can sometimes suggest a scummy reason for voting.
vote: K7if you are a vanilla townie you should be doing much more to help our cause. i have never agreed with a policy lynch, but you are making the case for this yourself with your indgnant attitude.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
Plonky wrote:
Don_johnson - please explain exactly what potential benefits you see as resulting from a killa7 lynch, and contrast that to the potential costs that oculd arise (essentially a simple cost-benefit analysis).
benefits: he is likely scum due to his unwillingness to participate and his "lynch me, i don't care" attitude. it will discourage his playstyle. he has been entirely unhelpful, i don't see benefit in his play so far. at best, all he has done is "muddy the waters". i find it more likely he is scum than just an annoying townie.
costs: he claimed vanilla. if he is vanilla, then the cost is low. a townie wouldn't lie about this so i must believe that he is either a vanilla townie or scum. those on his bandwagon may have easy outs when it comes to explaining away their votes.
i am getting tired of his non participation and flippant attitude. if you sign up for this game, play. if you can't, then replace. i also disagree with this:
anti-town =/= scummy, but someone being anti-town is plenty reason to vote and/or lynch someone. good scum aren't going to appear scummy, but they will exhibit anti town behavior.Being anti-town is not the same as being scummy. It is not a satisfactory reason for voting for somebody.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
it is a wifomic reason to halt a wagon. scum can, and do, fake claim vanilla. someone claiming vanilla is not a valid reason, in and of itself, to halt a wagon. if K7 is town, then he should be posting content to avoid being lynched as by not doing so he would not be playing to his win condition. claiming "vanilla" and saying "go ahead and lynch me" doesn't seem like a very town play to me. it sounds, to me, like scum trying to justify their lurking by feigning indifference to the game.Herodotus wrote:
How is that?don_johnson wrote:
all the more reason not to let it stop this one.I've never seen a vanilla claim stop a lynch wagon though.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
the vanilla claim is irrelevant. it should not sway us one way or the other. refusing to claim or claiming a pr would have sparked discussion and also put him in position to be counterclaimed, two things scum tend to avoid. the vanilla claim does support the idea of him being scum and feigning indifference, however, aside from that, the claim itself is really irrelevant as it also supports the theory of lazy townie. that said: i think he's our best shot at scum as of right now.Herodotus wrote: I still don't understand. I understood your statement to mean that decisions made by other towns in the past to lynch vanilla claimers should guide our decision here. I don't see the reasoning you are using. I can agree with the part about justifying lurking. The scum don't want attention; that would be a motivation not to post. If that's his intent, it's obviously backfired. But would you guess that his vanilla claim increases the odds that that's the case? As opposed to refusing to claim or claiming a power role?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i don't think i can explain what i meant any better than i have.Herodotus wrote:I still can't understand this:
The words AC wrote, and their connection to the words you wrote. AC is clearly referring to what other towns have done in the past. If vanilla claims never stopped other towns' wagons, why isdon_johnson wrote:
all the more reason not to let it stop this one.I've never seen a vanilla claim stop a lynch wagon though.thata reason not to let one stop this wagon? I'm guessing you've already explained it in some fashion in your posts since I asked, but I don't see the reference to continuing the past policy.
no to first question. as i said: the claim is really irrelevant. its the attitude that i find scummy. second question is kind of leading. i would answer: yes, but time may not be the only factor to finding a stronger scumtell.herod wrote:
Does that mean that anyone who claims townie and doesn't seem to care if they're lynched on day one is likely scum? Also, even if Killer is our best shot right now, isn't there a good chance that we will, in time, be able to find a stronger scumtell than the possibility that one player's indifference is feigned?don_johnson wrote:the vanilla claim is irrelevant. it should not sway us one way or the other. refusing to claim or claiming a pr would have sparked discussion and also put him in position to be counterclaimed, two things scum tend to avoid. the vanilla claim does support the idea of him being scum and feigning indifference, however, aside from that, the claim itself is really irrelevant as it also supports the theory of lazy townie. that said: i think he's our best shot at scum as of right now.
i think his recent statements are based on dangerous assumptions. i.e. attributing K7's play to bad scum. i think the wagon is justifiable at this point. he seems content to lynch a townie. i need to reread a bit.herod wrote: What do you think of the AC wagon? He's estimated only a 1/6 chance the person he's voting for is scum. Obviously, you'd rate the probability a bit higher, but would you say that AC's own statements indicate scumminess on his part?
how do you know we aren't targetting actual scum? if you can clear K7 i suiggest you do so.plonky wrote:I'm puzzled, as mentioned before, as to why a lynch at the moment is best.Especially since we are targetting an annoyance rather than actual scum.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
very different note. no double standards. i don't know K7's alignment and never claimed to. plonky's statement can clearly be interpreted as though he KNOWS we aren't targeting actual scum.ZEEnon wrote:
on the same note, how do you know we are ?don_johnson wrote:how do you know we aren't targetting actual scum? if you can clear K7 i suiggest you do so.
you are asking for him to have proof to clear him,
yet you have no proof to condemn him. do i see double standards ?
better words would have been "we may be". saying "we are" implies that he knows. what i am saying is that if heplonky wrote:I'm puzzled, as mentioned before, as to why a lynch at the moment is best. Especially sincewe aretargetting an annoyance rather than actual scum.knowshe needs to explain how he knows.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
hold onto your hats...
i've been rereading a bit and found some gems:
however, in his own defense:plonky wrote:Being anti-town is not the same as being scummy. It is not a satisfactory reason for voting for somebody.
if we use votes to express suspicion, and being anti-town is not a satisfactory reason for voting somebody, then are you saying that you are not suspicious of anti-town behavior?plonky wrote:So you honestly think it is better for me to keep my vote on someone for a random reason than to use it in a way to express suspicion?
also:
hmm. plonky thinks K7 is a "useless townie".plonky wrote:Therefore, my view is that killa seven is an unsatisfactory lynch at this point. Sure, he's not contributing much, but we simply don't have the time to lynch him. We need to catch scum,not lynch useless townies.
really? aren't scum often "anti-town" players?plonky wrote: Lynching an anti-town player doesn't make sense when trying to catch scum.
i find this interesting, mainly because bandwagon analysis is a much better tool once someone has been lynched and their alignment is revealed. it does make sense to look for "oppurtunistic bandwagon jumpers", but why are you so sure that these "jumpers" are better targets?plonky wrote:I find killa seven supremely boring and will be shifting focus immediately onto better targets (most likely those who jumped opportunistically onto his wagon).
lookie there, still thinking K7 is town.plonky wrote:For the town, it is sub-optimal to even consider lynching someone who is probably town. The ONLY people who gain tremendously from this move are the scum.
this after a vote for ac1983fan and the reasoning:plonky wrote:For those still voting for killa7, I'd like to know why you honestly cannot find anyone more scummy than him, because that's either scummy or suggests somewhat under-par scum-hunting abilities.
wow. those are some serious scumhunting skills ya got there.plonky wrote: I agree with all the comments said about him.
sorry, but not agreeing with the lynch is one thing, but doing so because you are getting some sort of town read on a lurker is simply fallacious. not sure if you are trying to look pro town here, or are just defending your scumbuddy. either way, you are scum.
vote: plonkytown 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
sorry, i am here. i was waiting on an answer from plonky. i thought zero's message was clear, but i don't see how it translates to a vote. can you detail ac's "methods" of getting suspicion on you?
Top of page 15 vote count:
killa seven 4 (Tovarish, dejkha, Jazzmyn, ZEEnon)
ac1983fan 3 (q21, Plonky, Zer0ph34r)
Herodotus 1 (ZEEnon)
Plonky 1 (don_johnson)
dejkha 1 (Herodotus)
Not voting: killa seven, Erratus Apathos
With 12 still packing it takes 7 to lynch.
Note: this vote count should be accurate as of this post.
Prods: don_johnson, Plonky
Plonky did not pick up his prod from Friday, he has until tomorrow to pick it up and post before I start looking for a replacement.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
can we see the case on dejkha? i.e. what makes dej scummier than K7?Herodotus wrote:
If people don't have more that they want to say on day one, I think it's time we went ahead and lynched Dejkha to make sure he's scum. He hasn't said anything of consequence since Wednesday, so to all those on the killer wagon, I say why not choose the lurker against whom we have a few pieces of evidence of a scummy motivation? If you really want Killer dead, we can consider that issue tomorrow if he's still alive. There's some chance we have a vig, and I'd say vigging a useless person is better than lynching them, if they need to die.
porkens, please note that you are replacing a player with several suspicions on him(post 302). if you can answer any of the questions please do, though i understand you will not be able to slice open plonky's head and read his brains. does anyone know if plonky dissappeared from the whole site, or just this game?
but i will need to see a bit more from you in terms of analysis...town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
porkens, may i say you are doing a much better job than your predecessor. however, if you click on Zero's wiki link it may explain where dej is getting his information and why he is hesitant to lynch the poor bastard. but i digress, dejkha's activity seems to have jumped quite a bit here.
Top of page 16 vote count:
killa seven 4 (Tovarish, dejkha, Jazzmyn, ZEEnon)
ac1983fan 2 (q21, Zer0ph34r)
dejkha 2 (Herodotus, ac1983fan)
Plonky 1 (don_johnson)
Tovarish 1 (Porkens)
Not voting: killa seven, Erratus Apathos
With 12 still packing it takes 7 to lynch.
Note: this vote count should be accurate as of this post.
Prods: killa seven, q21, Tovarish, ZEEnon, Zer0ph34rtown 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
maybe i'm mistaken here, but dej specifically stated that heporkens wrote:Attacking someone for a valid reason is not a scumtell, obviously. However, if that attack serves as a defense of someone else, then it can come into question. In addition, defending someone, instead of letting someone defend themselves, links you to them.Note, here, that you just called it a defense.wouldn'tcall what he did a defense. >>
someone please explain this if i am reading it wrong.dej wrote:I wouldn't say I'm "defending" Zer0, but you can call it what you want.
there are three questions for plonky in post 302. perhaps you missed them, but they are the sentences that end with question marks.porkens wrote: Also, I don't see a clear question in that post for the theoretical plonky to answer. I think DJ was looking for an "answer" to the general case by way of defense, perhaps?
personally, i don't think zero has been "intentionally" building anything except maybe a fort with his giant legos. at least he's voting.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i guess we have to disagree there. i still don't see an "admission".Porkens wrote:Don; I think the pronouns are getting a little vague. I was referring to this statement, by Dej, about what AC did:
Porkens wrote:2. Ac attacked someone for attacking you. That's a form of defense. (Para: Therefore, I suspect AC and or Dej are scum)Dej wrote:Defending someone is not a scum tell when it's not stretching to find something wrong. Ac had a reasonable response to what Plonky said. And it looks like you're using that way more than you should be as an excuse to suspect people.
This, to me, could indicate that Dej admits the attack was, at least in part, a chainsaw defense.
yes, i was looking for a response in general. i was simply responding to your statement of not seeing any questions.porkens wrote:
I guess I misunderstood the intent of the questions; I thought you were building a general case and wanted plonky to respond in general.
no, you cannot answer these questions and i did not bring it up to imply that i wanted you to. but no, they were not rhetorical. i expected answers. i wanted plonky to clarify his statements. the added vote was mainly to pressure. you stated you didn't see questions. i am just pointing out that there were.porkens wrote:
1 and 2, to me, look like rhetorical questions that just poke big holes in plonky's logic; not actually meant to be answered.
3, after reading it again, does warrant an answer, but it's not a hold-up-the-game earth shatter-er answer. I mean; no, we'll never know why plonky thought the "jumpers" were better targets than the lurkers, but...that's minor at best, no?
good point. i should read it again, but i thought he referred to specific games. we could always research the authenticity of his wiki. personally, i am getting more "dumb" vibes than "scum" vibes. K7's lurking seemed much more intentional. alas, they may be two peas in a pod.porkens wrote:I dunno, I'm pretty sure he writes his own wiki...
K7: i do see your point on zero's vote, but your play is hypocritical. i.e. you have no credibility in this thread, so even if you find something scummy, you are giving noone here any reason to believe you, which only further empowers the idea of a K7 lynch. a townie should present better reasoning than post 384.
vote: K7would rather seeyoulynched than anyone at this point. i don't believe you are dumb, and i can't find a townie reason why you would be acting the way you are. you are flagrantly riding an anti-town playstyle in hopes of just slipping under the radar. you must be scum.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i am always suspicious of the first to post on day 2. especially when they write:
we can all read. added commentary like that above is usually considered a "scum tell".acfan wrote:Well, that sucks... we lost our cop and a townie.
ac: i don't get your vote. what is your actual reasoning?
i am not sure what to make of the "brothers", but it seems we won't be getting answers. the one who reacted suspiciously is no longer among us.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i am going to reread. dej seems an odd choice for sk. the whole "brothers" thing is definitely odd now. of course, if zero killed his brother he's not going to cooperate with an investigation, so i am not sure if that is even a plausible avenue.
i am still flustered by ac's opening post.
of course you don't think its a scumtell.acfan wrote:Discussion = good for town.
Hammering when good discussion is going on = bad for town.
I don't really think it's a scumtell, I guess I just type out whatever I'm thinking at the time of my post. Obviously it's not really necessary, but I don't know, I feel compulsed to say whatever I think, regardless if it is necessary/obvious.
Porkens hammer was quick, however, he stuck to his word. of course, he was replacing plonky, who left some unanswered questions, and the Herodscum theory is also extreme wifomic speculation.
reading tov in isolation i see this as out of place. prior to this, tov had only voiced suspicion of K-7, with some suspicion on me for what seemed like a misunderstanding. what sticks out to me is the "yet". at what point was this going to be "scummy"? Tov's case on K7 was extremely similar. i.e. "k7 is scum because he's unhelpful." if you simply add the word "scum" to ac's accusations then you have a match. was this post a distancing attempt?tov wrote:^ Right now I see AC as eager to lynch k7 precisely because he's so unhelpful. While I see it as tunnel-vision, it's not particularly scummy. Yet.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
would like to hear from sotty7.
the first question makes some sense. however, i doubt that someone would play several games poorly just to establish meta for when they are scum.porkens wrote:Also, why have you put so much effort into your wiki and none into improving your play?
The only reason I can think of is that you are intentionally setting up a meta for yourself for when you are eventually scum.
Zero: who is your top suspect and why?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
good call EA, but i believe the person who brought up the fact that tomorrow might be lylo was in fact acfan. am i wrong on this point?
the only way tomorrow could be lyloandacfan be sk is if there are three scum, no? i think the question we should be asking is how acfan seems so sure that there are three scum.
well?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
can anyone explain a "pro town" reason to not lynch acfan?
i just don't see it. it seems that based on some current assumptions(i.e. three player mafia team, serial killer) that town may be in lylo regardless of what is done today. keeping fan alive gives a viable lynch tomorrow, but then we'd be in the same position we are now.
bottom line seems: ac1983fan is a claimed anti town role. 100% correct for a lynch.
vote: ac1983fansomeone please explain to me if i am missing something.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
of course you don't.Zer0ph34r wrote: And as for the bong thing, I don't have one.
Hero: do you believe acfan's claim?
problem seems to be, if we lynch a townie today, this game could be over. we would basically be relying on a "cross-kill" to keep town in the game. am i wrong?
does anyone have a better solution?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
how does mafia get "the upperhand"? mafia has the upper hand. its part of the game mechanics. even if you are who you say you are(and i don't think that you are) there is no benefit to keep you around. will someone explain the benefit of keeping around an uncounterclaimed serial killer? i seemed to have missed that somewhere.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
not at the moment. the entire scenario feels contrived. though herod's posts have some genuine feel to them, he did actually create a safehaven for an anti-town claim. also, i think it is in acfan's best interest to get us to mislynch or for him to kill a townie tonight. if we lynch scum and he crosskills scum(if he is sk) and we work on the assumption of three scum, then that puts the win virtually out of reach for him. with two scum its a town win.Sotty7 wrote:
You don't think Ac is the SK?don_johnson Post 521 wrote:how does mafia get "the upperhand"? mafia has the upper hand. its part of the game mechanics. even if you are who you say you are(and i don't think that you are) there is no benefit to keep you around. will someone explain the benefit of keeping around an uncounterclaimed serial killer? i seemed to have missed that somewhere.
so in either case it seems in sk's best interest to not lynch scum. to wifom it, there is no way i would claim sk if i was sk at this point in the game. i feel as though it is a scum ploy to draw out the real sk.
also i would rather be in lylo against one faction than two. as i said, depending on the numbers and truth of this claim, we will find ourselves in this same situation tomorrow. and this situation gives me a headache.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
ebwop: what i'm saying is that no matter how you slice this pineapple, acfan should be lynched. i am willing to explore other possibilities(roleblocking etc.) but personally i don't see how it changes the situation a great deal. there are too many unkowns and the information gained from his lynch could break this game open. i.e. if he is scum, then it shouldn't be hard to figure out who his partners are.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
so who do you think is the sk?ac1983fan wrote:
They could do that. But what if that failed? A lynch is the only unstoppable (well, almost unstoppable) method of killing somebody. All others can be prevented by roleblocks, protections, etc.Sotty7 wrote:
They would just kill you over night.ac1983fan wrote:
Why would the SK not cc? the SK would want to get rid of me also in that situation if he were smart. But I'm the real SK, so any cc is maf.Porkens wrote:there is, of course, the possibility that your maf and fakeclaimed. In that scenario, I bet the SK would stay quiet.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
if you are sk and we lynch you(assuming three scum), tomorrows chances are 3/6 of hitting scum give or take actions of any unclaimed power roles.ac1983fan wrote: First of all, if I'm alive and we choose to try and lynch mafia, the chances of us hitting mafia are changed from 3/9 to 3/8 for today.
did anyone claim "pro town roleblocker"? how do you know that there is one?ac wrote: Secondly, if things are starting to look mafia sided, (ie we mislynch)I can attempt to kill a mafia member and hope that the pro-town roleblocker knows the numbers and that the mafia doesn't have a roleblocker.
we should lynch ac1983fan. even if he is sk we will most likely still have numbers in our favor tomorrow. knowing his actual alignment will be very useful either way.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
hero: i don't know if i want to gamble. that's basically what you want us to do. also, we are all completely ignoring the fact that their may be a two player scum team and not three. i believe that would screw up the math for most of this.
porkens: in mini 730 i believe you only had one partner, correct?
the fact that acfan speaks "knowingly" of a pro town roleblocker seems to me as though possibly either he or his scumbuddy were "roleblocked". this to me would be indicative of a two person scum team with some ability(s). also, acfan could be setting the stage for a scum roleblocker to claim "pro town". i just don't see acfan as sk, especially since he doesn't seem to know whether or not he is immune to nightkill.
hero: my suspicion of you has faded. i have mulled it over and though your posts seem a little contrived it occurred to me that if you were scumbuddies with acfan there is no way you could have known of the existence of sk before the start of day 2. do scum ever get to day talk outside game threads? i highly doubt that scenario. also, ea's behavior has been off since the start of this discussion, especially his chiming in for a poorly reasoned vote on porkens. anyway, barring a scum confession, counterclaim, or juicy exchange, i will only be moving my vote to avoid a no lynch. acfan claimed anti town. i think we are foolish to bargain with scum.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
i never asked him to reveal. i would rather he didn't, however, when he approached the subject in an earlier post it sounded as if he did not know. i.e. it didn't seem like he was bluffing or avoiding. i will look back for the quote when i have time, but it was something in particular that stood out to me.Herodotus wrote:
Is there any pro-town reason for you to want acfan to reveal whether he is immune to nightkill?don_johnson wrote:i just don't see acfan as sk, especially since he doesn't seem to know whether or not he is immune to nightkill.
acfan: why would one think there might be a "pro town" roleblocker? possibilities are endless, but your statement seemed to exhibit actual knowledge and not just a possibility. your statement says you "hope that the pro town roleblocker knows the numbers", not "if there is a protown roleblocker, i hope he knows the numbers." get it. seems lilke a slip to me.
zero: what the hell are you talking about? what does your "sanity" have to do with any of this? i don't think a no lynch would do us any good. why do you suggest it?town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
no, i don't doubt his claim because he hadn't told us.Herodotus wrote:
I'm not going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but maybe you can find whatever it is you are referring to. I've reviewed him and not found it. You said that you doubt his claim because he hasn't told us whether he's NK-immune. That implies he needs to state it one way or another to convince you to believe him.don_johnson wrote:i never asked him to reveal. i would rather he didn't, however, when he approached the subject in an earlier post it sounded as if he did not know. i.e. it didn't seem like he was bluffing or avoiding. i will look back for the quote when i have time, but it was something in particular that stood out to me.I doubt his claim because of a particular post which i will find for you which led me to believe that he did not know whether he was nk immune.he seemed to waffle on the subject. i already voiced that i didn't think it should be addressed, but my doubt is very much becaude of something he stated. i find it odd that he is now claiming immunity after we discussed how the subject should be left alone.
dude, you have no idea what kind of time i have to play this game. i asked porkens, because he had a scum role in that game and i could not recall the numbers. my computer and i are ships passing in the night sometimes, and i make every effort i can to be active in games i sign up for, so . yeah. whatever.hero wrote:
It would have taken about 30 seconds to look this up, even if you hadn't been in the game. Very strange that you chose instead to ask Porkens, who may have had to look it up himself if he didn't remember the number of that game.don_johnson wrote:porkens: in mini 730 i believe you only had one partner, correct?
there are ways the scum team could know of the existence of a town roleblocker. there is also the possibility of a scum roleblocker setting up a fake claim. the way he wrote the statement was matter-of-fact. all i am doing is pointing that out. i see no reason to believe acfan's claim at this point. if i were sk i wouldn't be counterclaiming. i wouldn't have claimed in the first place.hero wrote:
I don't see how it's a slip. This is a normal game, so no scum would start with information about town power roles. There are very, very few ways he could have learned of the existence of such a role. But he's been guessing that there's a RB/Jailer since post 507.don_johnson wrote:acfan: why would one think there might be a "pro town" roleblocker? possibilities are endless, but your statement seemed to exhibit actual knowledge and not just a possibility. your statement says you "hope that the pro town roleblocker knows the numbers", not "if there is a protown roleblocker, i hope he knows the numbers." get it. seems lilke a slip to me.And besides, acfan doesn't have much left to slip. I'd imagine that claiming a scum role must be pretty liberating.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra
in response to "they could kill you overnight":
^^ post i was referring to. just seems like this would have been a good chance to at least hint at immunity. hard to say, but this statement pinged ignorance to me.acfan wrote:They could do that. But what if that failed? A lynch is the only unstoppable (well, almost unstoppable) method of killing somebody. All others can be prevented by roleblocks, protections, etc.town 39-32
mafia 17-9
sk 0-6-
-
don_johnson Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Jack of All Trades
- Posts: 7398
- Joined: December 4, 2008
- Location: frozen tundra