Mini 807 - Save the Mafia! (Game Over!)

[stuntkeyboardist]

/confirm

canadianbovine, i really like your avatar

[stuntkeyboardist]

thank you nohands. used to love ZIM back in the day. so far i like CBD's [havent seen that character in forever] and RECKONER

same here, i havent seen it in like 3 years, but i recently got into supernatural and firefly **nods to wolframnhart**

[stuntkeyboardist]

yea nohandtyper i been a joss whedon fan for ever, but i like firefly out of all his work, just wish it hadn't ended so soon.

I watched buffy and angel when they were new. I never actually heard of firefly until about 2 weeks ago, and since then I have watched every episode and the movie. It was so amazing and I too am sad that it was so short lived.

[stuntkeyboardist]

He could be posting with another body part.

Let's not go there...

vote: DeathRowKitty

because I dont know you!

[stuntkeyboardist]

vote: DeathRowKitty because I dont know you!

nice to meet you too

lol. I've met a few people on this board already. I'd feel bad voting for them, but since that isnt your fault, I'll

unvote

you (for now).

[stuntkeyboardist]

And his answer will help us...how?.

That's exactly what I was thinking. I'll tell you honestly it's just meant to be a little odd. I didn't really expect any 'discussion' on it.

I'm still not understanding the re-vote thing though.

[stuntkeyboardist]

mod, you're missing someone. we have twelve players but only eleven voting/not voting in your list.

[stuntkeyboardist]

you're missing My Milked Eek

Thanks, corrected

[stuntkeyboardist]

FoS lobster? I'm just all out

vote

ing

: canadianbovine

I wasn't so sure about voting him before, but his banter on sparking discussion sounds too much like every other person's nervous banter when they're playing scum and caught in their words (I've been VERY guilty of that myself). You wanted it, now let the game begin.

[stuntkeyboardist]

np mod. With 12 players, it isnt hard to lose one.

[stuntkeyboardist]

canadianbovine, I've nothing to ask at the moment. I'm just observing for a bit.

Tone: casual

[stuntkeyboardist]

bovine, I do not think your actions were some ultimate planned out thing

I had not woken up today intending to unvote then revote to invoke discussion. That wasn't in my plan at all. In fact, you can say I have no plan as of yet.

Reckoner, don't you see what I've done? I have caused significant discussion out of insignificant discussion.

No hands should take nothing personal from the revote. It has done its' job, everyone magically appeared, and here we are.

Is it not a plan when you take action because you intend for something to happen in the future because of it?

[stuntkeyboardist]

The vote is the most important tool of the town. Its use is pressure, something a FoS really doesn't do on any real level, and not using the vote, especially early on when there's a bigger margin before a lynch, means you're not pressuring any possible scum.

Lobstermania random voted, so it's clear he recognises that his vote can put pressure on people and maybe make scum trip up, so the fact that there is now someone he genuinely suspects means that he really should be using his vote to put pressure on CB. There's no reason why lobstertown shouldn't be voting CB at this time, but lobsterscum might well want to avoid a bandwagon on CBtown, or even be trying to keep the pressure off CBscum.

Very well put, but I dont think he was saying he wasnt going to vote, I think it was more of an, "I dont really know right now, let me think on it first. lobster is fairly new, but at the same time, I think his choice is also pretty rational. At the time, I dont feel like there is any significant argument against lobster.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'm not trying to put words in his mouth, but can you say you've never held off voting before? I cant whether I stated it or not. I just don't think he put his explanation well into words. Either way, I don't feel it was that scummy.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Ok, so I just got home from work and see that I've missed about 50 posts. The sad part is, the game didn't even move forward.

I'll expand on this soon, but I have a few things I have to do first.

Also, like CDB, it's probably easier to refer to me as NHT. Short, awesome, and to the point.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'd like to know what you mean by saying the game didn't move forward. The game is no longer in the random phase and a few people have made interesting posts regarding what is viewed as scummy behavior.

While I don't really see anyone broadcasting scum to me yet, I've gathered a bit of information on the logic of some of the other players.

And in my opinion, that moves the game forward.

Just to be clear, I was here when the whole random voting thing ended. Note that it was my sn that was the beginning of the whole argument. While you werent here for over a day, I was only gone for about 10 hours. The only thing that was established during that time was... well really nothing. It was basically just people reiterating the same point.

Has the main suspect changed? no
Has lobster become a suspect? that stayed about the same

The only different was that a few people came back. But as a few of the others have stated, I would also like to know about what you've gathered. If you're town, it would be pretty helpful to the rest of the town (well, I mean "town"). Otherwise, I dont see why you'd withhold valuable information that could lead to a scum lynch...

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'd like to know what you mean by saying the game didn't move forward. The game is no longer in the random phase and a few people have made interesting posts regarding what is viewed as scummy behavior.

While I don't really see anyone broadcasting scum to me yet, I've gathered a bit of information on the logic of some of the other players.

And in my opinion, that moves the game forward.

Just to be clear, I was here when the whole random voting thing ended. Note that it was my sn that was the beginning of the whole argument. While you werent here for over a day, I was only gone for about 10 hours. The only thing that was established during that time was... well really nothing. It was basically just people reiterating the same point.

Has the main suspect changed? no
Has lobster become a suspect? that stayed about the same

The only different was that a few people came back. But as a few of the others have stated, I would also like to know about what you've gathered. If you're town, it would be pretty helpful to the rest of the town (well, I mean "town"). Otherwise, I dont see why you'd withhold valuable information that could lead to a scum lynch...

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry about the double post, my internet cut off when I first tried to post resulting in a double.

my bad

[stuntkeyboardist]

*Wicked

What I meant was, I was going to come back and reply, I just never got the time. My post earlier basically expanded on the nothingness. To me, for the most part, nothing groundbreaking has happened. Nothing has caused me to think differently about about anyone, or think differently about the game since my post early yesterday. So, **to me** nothing important happened.

Do you understand what I mean?

(This post isnt meant to sound mean or rude. (I'll put this at the bottom from time to time so people dont interpret differently than I intend))

[stuntkeyboardist]

I revoted him to invoke discussion and keep pressure on him.

Can you explain what you meant by "keep pressure on him", when there were only two votes including yours? I'm not asking you to lie. I would however like to know what kind of pressure you thought there was on someone at L-5.

THANK YOU!! After reading the whole "keep pressure on him" about 40 times, I got to thinking, what pressure was there?

Two votes mean nothing, plus, nobody suspected me. It was just two RANDOM votes.

[stuntkeyboardist]

candadian, the reason people are voting for you/your scummy behavior is that you don't seem to know what you want to do. You vote me, you unvote me, you vote me. You have no plan, but you planned to vote me to put imaginary pressure on me to spark conversation... but you have no plan even though you did this intentionally. Then when you try to defend yourself, you again jump back and forth on why you voted for me as well as whether you have a plan or not.

Please give us straight answers and explain why you were so back and forth.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'll give CB that. He only stated that lobster hadnt responded, not that he was lurking. I dont feel that that is a solid argument.

Also, about the game w/ lobster, CDB, and I; it was not my first game of mafia ever, it was my first on the site. I do have plenty of experience playing w/ friends and others. I dont know if this helps or not, but I just wanted to make it clear.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I know this doesnt have a lot to do with this game, but I re-read through the first one that I played (it was linked in an earlier post). The entirety of that game is about the length of this first day.

I'm still not entirely convinced that CB is town. He still seemed all over the place. I will say though, that I dont see him as being as scummy as before. My vote will stay for now. I will remove it when there is risk of a hammer unless for some reason, I become sure again.

I'm going to re-read through the this entire game after work later.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Why would that be useful? Each person has their own uses for each thing:

Example, for me, a vote is placed where I feel the most suspicion lies at that moment. I only tend to use an FoS in two situations: either I already have a vote down, or I'm equally suspicious of multiple people.

I think applying pressure is sometimes more of a scumtell than a town tell. If you lay a case against someone or ask them a question and they dodge it, THEN maybe you can vote to "apply pressure". Otherwise I think it's a wishy-washy reason to place a vote.

very, VERY well put.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Ok, I just re-read the entire game, and I've come to the conclusion that we're basically grasping at VERY VERY thin straws here. Everything that we're accusing one another of isn't scummy behavior, but a minor contradiction. Ten we ask that person a series of ridiculous questions which, in turn, gets the person caught up in their own words. We dont have ANY solid arguments here, and I really dont think I'm the only person to notice this.

I'm going to

unvote

CB and apologize because I realize that it wasnt that big of a deal to REINSTATE a vote, but at the same time, I dont feel that the argument against wolframnheart is a solid one for the same reason. It was a slight contradiction that is being blown out of proportion.

The only thing that I noticed while re-reading was that CDB is the only person jumping on accusing people, and again, the accusations are for very weak mistakes. I'm going to put this out there now:

FoS CDB

.

You're appearing as desperate o find someone to lynch.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually, i think I'm just going to spread the wealth and upgrade that FoS to a

vote: CDB

.

[stuntkeyboardist]

NHT - if I was desperate for a lynch, I'd be voting CB right now. Thanks for playing.

But I think we all know that no one else was going to vote for him anyway, which could be a reason to jump ship.

[stuntkeyboardist]

"Jump ship"? I was never

on

the ship.

If you feed the fire, you're on the ship.

Too many idioms here. I need to calm that down. But you know what I mean.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually, looking back on it, you started

all

of the fires, then continued to feed them. I'm not going to say nobody else helped feed, but you were the primary attacker.

EX. post 52/54

post 96 - accusing/voting lobster. Sure wolfram first thought the line was a bit odd, but nobody else thought anything of it until you accused/voted him for it.

post 101 - accusing me of putting words in people's mouths when i basically stated my

interpretation

of lobsters post

post 177 - voting wolfram because it was brought up that CB never stated that lobster was lurking. you only voted wolfram because of this

Since this last one, you've just been attacking him for mix up of words. When I said CB never accused lobster of lurking, I wasn't trying to push wolfram under the bus. I was merely trying to say that it snowballed into what it is now.

Is this now clear that you have jumped on/started every bandwaggon in the game thus far? Now do you see why you're appearing desperate to have someone offed?

[stuntkeyboardist]

CDB, you misinterpreted what I was saying. I have to go to work now, but I'll be back later to expand on this.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I don't think I've made a baseless vote at all (assuming you don't count my random one). I agree that I've made

more

votes but that's mostly because people have been too caught up on the CB wagon.

Aside from the other misinterpretations in this post, I will say that I stand by the fact that you have not only accused most of the targets so far, but bandwaggoned when you didnt. Your vote keeps jumping to the next person in line. As far as your reasoning, like I said before, I thought a lot of it based on someone wording something wrong which contradicted something (lobster), or based on things what were blown out of proportion (wolfram).

(And I'd like to repeat that you can't claim I started the CB wagon if I didn't actually

vote

for the guy)

You were both the first to accuse the guy, and to provide the evidence. Whether you voted or not doesnt matter. Because of your accusation, 5 of us did vote for him. I wont try to deny why I did either, you had a good point... until I reread. See post 196 for my reasoning for unvoting though.

I don't understand the fuss about CDB. Reminds me of my first game, when somebody used the argument "he's so town, he must be scum."

Not even close to my argument. Try looking at the posts above.

I don't like wolf's play.

Vote: Wolframnhart

I have my reasons.

I know I'm voting wolfram, but that's an incredibly scummy post.

FoS: Reckoner

I completely agree with CDB here. Too broad, no posts in a while then BAM, plus, if you have reasons, please share. It might be helpful to the rest of us... plus it doesnt make you look as suspicious.

I think that if reckoner thought it would be better for the town to withhold his information, then he should.

By that reasoning, scum can choose not to give evidence and just say 'they have their reasons' and avoid having to explain themselves to the town. Scum explaining their logic to the town is how the town catches scum, so scum don't explain if they don't have to. Town shouldn't need to hide away from that.

Again, very well put. Since I'm not the type of person to hold a grudge, I will

unvote

and apologize. As of now, there is a lot going on in these past few hours. I want to see reactions before I vote again. I will say, however, that you, CDB, have a way with words. While I still do not like your constant accusations, some of the past few posts have been dead on to my reactions (which is why I unvoted you).

If anybody has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. I had a lot in my mind and I know I didnt get it all out in this one post. I will post more as I remember.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I don't like wolf's play.

Vote: Wolframnhart

I have my reasons.

The discussion on this post is actually quite good. When I first read it, I thought nothing of it. I've seen it happen many times (mainly in live games) where the person is trying to see who's desperate to vote. The only difference is that it's normally executed much more effectively, and with an actual argument to back it up.

When it comes down to it, you're either bandwaggoning or bandwaggoning at this point. After almost two pages, you still have no real argument against Wolfram other than other peoples', and your trap was horribly executed. Yet you are still holding that vote for Wolfram even though your "trap" failed.

1

Certain posts from wolframnhart have struck me as funny. Maybe it's the way he tries to insinuate lobster here without much backing of his own.

2

In my experience, the You're not adding to discussion argument is more often a scum trying to put a halfway decent bit of logic behind what he's saying rather than actually defend himself. It's an easy out.

3

Then there's the obvious lobster was lurking bit when he wasn't really lurking, and then wolfram quickly retraces his steps. Yes, he never said lobster was lurking, but he implied it and attempted to use it to cast suspicion.

1) You accuse wolfram of not backing up his argument!!? It's funny that you're using this excuse when you posted the line "I have my reasons" and didnt explain your vote either. Especially when you try to explain yourself with this half-assed explanation that can be torn to shreds.
2) Typically that argument is correct in being a scum tell, but typically that's in a later day than day one when there is little to no concrete evidence.
3) I think you know how I feel about the lurking argument. Read page 9.

I'm going to put an

FoS xReckonerx

on you. Please try again to explain yourself. If you dont want to, I'd be happy to upgrade that FoS.

[stuntkeyboardist]

1) should read:

1) You accuse wolfram of not backing up his argument!!? It's funny that you're using this excuse when you posted the line "I have my reasons" and didnt explain your vote either until this half-assed explanation that can be torn to shreds.

[stuntkeyboardist]

This may seem incredibly stupid, but what is "N0" Cop?

I've played with cops before, and again, I primarily play in person so we wouldn't use abbreviations, but I don't know what the "N0" part means.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Night 0 cop, it means they could make a check before the game started.

tyvm

[stuntkeyboardist]

I don't really know what I need to respond to after that re-read. All the constant quoting and whatnot confused me more than helped. If someone could lay out what they want me to respond to, I will.

I still feel like MME was just waiting for a chance to direct attention away from wolf, and jumped on the chance. Even if people felt like my post was scummy, they didn't immediately jump to voting me. He did.

Sorry, just got back in. I only had minute to talk before, but I finally got around to reading everything closely. It seems that DRK has taken over the xReckonerx argument, but I'm just puzzled by this quote. Before this, there were about 3 posts directed solely toward you, mine being one of them. How hard is it to see your name and respond to that post? Especially when you say "after that re-read." It should have been fresh in your mind.

To quote myself:

I'm going to put an

FoS xReckonerx

on you. Please try again to explain yourself. If you dont want to, I'd be happy to upgrade that FoS.

I think I'll upgrade.

vote: xRECKONERx

Respond to post #247 and I might downgrade it. But you'd better respond quickly. That vote puts you two away from lynch.

[stuntkeyboardist]

2) Typically that argument is correct in being a scum tell, but typically that's in a later day than day one when there is little to no concrete evidence.
3) I think you know how I feel about the lurking argument. Read page 9.

2) Like to use the word typically a lot, huh? I don't see why it should make any difference if it's a scumtell in D3 or a scumtell in D1. Scum tells are scum tells.
3) Okay.


I'd recommend a quick unvoting from someone. Because if I had to guess, I'd say this wagon on me is town-laden, meaning scum can swoop in for the kill any moment.

First thing's first. on comment 2, day one "You're not adding to the discussion comments" are not normally scum trying to point fingers like you clearly stated. It's a person looking for something to go by since they dont have kills or much solid information to work with. In a later day, if they use this argument and disregard all other kills and happenings, then it is often scum. See the difference between a D1 and a D3 post?

Also, by adding that third bullet, I was trying to tell you that your third argument was weak and that you needed to retool/come up with a better argument. Again, read page 9 for more information on the lurking situation. In fact, you can read the comments even after page 9. The others cover it as well and I think it's safe to say that that argument was disregarded. Try reaching for a longer straw.

As far as your final statements go, I had the same reaction as CB:

you're just trying to scare the town to unvote you.

You say this with extreme confidence. Almost cockiness one could say... as if you just proved us all wrong and this is your in-your-face moment (well, maybe not quite that drastic). You're trying to make us feel that if we don't unvote you now, we're going to lose because the scum could take over. But we dont know who the scum is for sure. Odds are the same for all of us, and the truth is, you said nothing in your defense... once again. Reiterating your argument doesn't help, but acting like it broke new ground doesn't help either. Rethink. My vote stays.

[stuntkeyboardist]

BTW, I'm not trying to sound like a douche, it just happens sometimes when I'm getting annoyed.

[stuntkeyboardist]

* any oddities among the persons on the wagon?
- I don't like nohand's spot on the wagon, considering NHT's previous votes. He unvoted his random vote too quickly, then jumped over to CB and held there for awhile, then once the CB case kinda died off he quickly switched to CDB, then went the safe route and FoS'd me, only to quote himself later and upgrade it to a vote while giving the out of (If you explain yourself, I'll gladly downgrade). And since the claim, I haven't heard from him.

To me, the random vote is a bit of a waste of a vote.

Then I played for a while and felt that CB was the likely suspect, as did many of us.

I later felt that CDB was a very possible suspect (and I still feel this way)

Just for note, I never said the word gladly.

The reason you havent heard from me? I had job training from 5-10 last night, then I went to a post-prom party until 5:30 this morning. I just woke up.

Now it's my turn. Fortunately for you Reckoner, I do believe your claim. I think it's far more specific than it otherwise should be if you were scum. The scum (in my experience) rarely claim power roles because it could easily back them into corners later on. Mafia Hitman just seems far too specific by name, and being a power-role wouldnt be a smart claim by you if you were scum. Let's put it this way, if you are indeed scum, we will find out for sure later due to the importance of your role. i will

unvote

, apologize and move on.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Basically, when everyone handed over their guns, I remained loyal to the mafia but didn't feel as comfortable handing my gun over like everyone else. My gun still had five bullets left over in it from the last job. So it says I'm going to deal with the anti-mafia agents the same way I deal with people in my normal job: by hunting them down.

I don't know what to think of this. It's very...

convenient

. I'd like to hear, in particular,

@ChannelDelibird

,

@nohandedtyper

and

@lobstermania

's views on this.

My view, it would make sense if he's to kill once every night. I'd say that that is what the five bullets are for. If he doesnt make a kill N1, then we would have something to discuss. Like I said before, a power role claim like this is bad for scum to do because it would back them into a corner later on. This is what I mean. If that kill doesnt come, we know something is up with this claim.

I'm also rather curious about what my "five shots" thing means.
Certainly that doesn't mean that there are five scum and seven town, does it? That seems waaaaay too one-sided.

I suspect that it is more likely to mean that the mod expects the game to last no longer than five nights. (or perhaps he was trying too hard on the flavour). Don't particularly want to play outguess-the-mod, so I think it is best to ignore it. At any rate, it shouldn't be an issue until five or six game days from now.

I'm thinking the five nights thing. I dont think the mod would include a detail like this for no reason. Wasnt it clear that we all gave up our weapons? Why would one person keep theirs if not to use it? I guess we will have to wait and see though.

I was actually thinking the same thing. I was going to wait for qax to respond to why he's so hesitant to accept a town vig claim and gauge his response, but for now, at least I'm not the only one to find him suspicious.

I felt similar to this, only with post #301. I felt qax was afraid that our case on Reckoner was falling, and wanted us to vote for him anyway. Which got me to thinking, that he was trying to get us to jump the gun. Then with post 312, he was trying to enforce this position again before getting moody on the rest of us for (1) unvoting, (2) DRK for FoSing him. When he says he doesnt give a crap about the FoS, but more about the "random" change in your suspect/vote. I think it was clear though Reckoner avoided yet another questioning opportunity, making look very scummy at the time. DRK's vote was very rational. He waited until he felt was the right time to cast his vote. Whether he finds someone else suspicious or not in the meantime should make no different.

Sorry this seems a bit choppy, I'm being rushed right now, but

FoS: qak

.

[stuntkeyboardist]

CDB, I said that in response to this:

(or perhaps he was trying too hard on the flavour)

I said that because I feel that your statement here is likely not right. iow, agreeing/enforcing that he probably will be killing every night.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I was wondering what you guys meant by wicked. He didnt seem all that suspicious, but then I looked back in the thread. The last time he posted was Thursday, June 18. I dont recall that he claimed low access, so he definitely should have posted. But I agree w/ conspicuous. I have nothing more that I think needs saying that hasnt already been said. We need a few people to check in.

[stuntkeyboardist]

@Town

: Sorry about this, but

I'm going to be V/LA till Tuesday at the earliest

.

I have a lot to respond to and more to comment on, but it would take too long to write the post, and I only have time right to post V/LA notices in the games I am active in.

Just to put my vote on someone suspicious to me, I'll make time for:

Vote: canadianbovine

for dodging my questions and playing a very shady game. He's not really participated tremendously since the game stopped focusing on him. There's more that I've mentioned in my earlier posts, but I apologize that this is all I have time for.

Maybe it's just me, but does this post seem like an "I being suspected/voted, so I wont be here to answer questions" sort of post? I mean, maybe you'll honestly be gone, but there were a few important points brought up regarding your game. By not answering these before you leave, it seems a bit dodgy. Plus, you said at 7:30 that you had a lot to say, and to ignore that for 7 hours, then saying you'll be gone seems VERY scummy to me.

Now, going by your "logic" of placing a vote, I think I'll just put mine on

vote:qax

right now. I'd like to hear your response to the earlier posts as well as your defense before you actually "leave."

[stuntkeyboardist]

Wow, this is a pretty slow day. I know this is off topic, but DRK, I love your avatar.

[stuntkeyboardist]

@Town

: Sorry about this, but

I'm going to be V/LA till Tuesday at the earliest

.

I have a lot to respond to and more to comment on, but it would take too long to write the post, and I only have time right to post V/LA notices in the games I am active in. [....] I apologize that this is all I have time for.

Maybe it's just me, but does this post seem like an "I being suspected/voted, so I wont be here to answer questions" sort of post? I mean, maybe you'll honestly be gone, but there were a few important points brought up regarding your game. By not answering these before you leave, it seems a bit dodgy. [....]

aying you'll be gone seems VERY scummy to me.

Seriously?!?

FoS: Nohands

, you're smarter than that. If you look at qax's other game he posted the same thing. Try harder.

You're FoSing me because I didnt read his other games. You know this right? And even so, how hard would it be to say the same thing in multiple games if it means you winning as scum in one. You're only taking his V/LA at face value. When he decides to come back, this can be discussed further as he will have to respond to everything that has been asked thus far.

But note that I'm not primarily voting for him because he's gone, but because he had HOURS to respond to what was happening. And at that time, a lot of it was focused around him. All we got was a, "Wow, there's a lot to say," then a few hours later, we got "There's a lot to say, but I'll be V/LA, so... bye." I mean, come on. It takes five minutes to respond to an argument, not 7 hours. He could have responded before he left.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Wicked, I'm not angry that you voted me, but when you vote me saying I was bandwaggoning, please note that I had reasons for all of my votes. Bandwaggoning is more jumping on other peoples' reasons.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry Wicked, I didnt see that you unvoted. I must have skipped over your post when I was skipping DRK's post-a-thon.

Mod, can we get an edit on those? Thank You

[stuntkeyboardist]

I will say this:

I will only kill at night if I'm positive on someone's scumminess.

Statistically speaking, you making a kill regardless would help the town immensely. Let me explain. The odds of scum right now are about 3/12 or 1/4. If an NS (non-scum) is lynched, then the scum kill an NS, the odds change to 3/10 being scum. Since you cant kill who the scum kill, you will be forced to attempt the 3/10 odds (not including yourself (so 1/3 for you). If you do kill an NS, the odds them become 1/3 for scum. Subtract those who know they are town, as well as you since your kill would indicate NS, and the odds change again to 3/7 for us (3/8 for you) to find the scum with a definite NS (you) plus ourselves.

So in other words. Today we have about a 1 in four chance of lynching scum. Throwing in Reckoner's vig kill, that will more than double our chances of killing scum (because te odds will have changed to either 1/5 or 3/10 depending on how we lynch). After that, we have a definite safe, plus we know ourselves (those of us who are NS) making the odds much greater for the town.

Of the three killings today, there can be a max of two scum kills. The table shows this:

0 scum kills = 3/9 overall, or 3/7 individually (.43)
1 scum kill = 2/9 overall, or 2/7 individually (.29)
2 scum kills = 1/9 overall, or 1/7 individually

If you were to not use your vig kill, these would be the odds tomorrow:

0 scum kills = 3/10 overall, or 3/9 individually (.33)
1 scum kill = 2/10 overall, or 2/9 individually. (.22)

As you can see, our odds are MUCH higher tomorrow regardless of whether you kill scum or not. Part of the reason being is that we know you're safe. If you get killed in the night though... well that's a different story because you wouldnt get your kill and our odds are right back to the first set.

If I wasnt clear on this, please feel free to ask. I know there is quite a bit of info here, but I'd be happy to clarify when I get back (in about four hours or so) because this is actually quite important. I'll be here for another 20 minutes though.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Just to add to my earlier post, that's based on completely random killings. Since we throw in logic and reason, our odds will still increase in all cases, but since we throw in the logic/reason twice when Reckoner makes his vig kill, our odds will then make him killing tonight even greater than before.

[stuntkeyboardist]

As you can see, our odds are MUCH higher tomorrow regardless of whether you kill scum or not.

I could be wrong, but isn't that offset by the increased chance of losing townies at night?

Slightly, but note that he cant kill himself or an NS that the scum will be killing. Plus throwing in the logic/reason, he would have a 1/3 (random) chance, but higher with his reason.

In the end, we would have a definite safe, which is pretty important. Plus a rather high chance that 1 scum will be killed based on our two attempts and good odds. Yes, it's a bit risky, but I feel (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) that it's worth it.

[stuntkeyboardist]

since we throw in the logic/reason twice when Reckoner makes his vig kill, our odds will then make him killing tonight even greater than before.

I'm not sure we'll learn much from Reckoner's kill, especially since he can just tell us and we know (or at least suspect very strongly) that he's town. All i can see it telling us is whether or not someone who's already dead is town or scum, which I don't see helping us all that much unless that person is scum.

I understand what you mean, but we dont know for sure that he's town, which would also be very beneficial information. I strongly feel he is, as I've stated before, but to be 100%, he would have to make the kill.

Please, others respond to these stats as well. Stats can actually be one of our best tools in the game, but we need the opinions and details that may have been missed.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Yeah.

I mean unless we have a Doc, I'm probably gone tonight anyway. I'm no good at math so I'll bow out of the calculations debate.

For what it's worth, the scum doesnt know what you're actually going to do. If you dont kill and the scum dont kill you, then the town has a great target for tomorrow. If they do kill you, then we have a lot to work with based on what happened today to hunt down the scum. Based on what has happened so far, the outcome depends on how we react and use the information given to us. This could work out to be great for the NS all around.

Still looking for more opinions though. And thank you DRK for your calculations. I havent been in Stats in over a year now, so my odds were based primarily on basic concepts and logic.

Looking at your calculations though, the amount of scum become:

Reckoner kills: .265
Reckoner doesnt kill: .269

or about 1/4 (very roughly). So by your calculations, it would be a wash either way, but slightly leaning toward not killing.

C'mon people, we need more opinions than just DRK's and mine here.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I see no need to discuss who Reckoner should or shouldn't be targeting. You know, because a vigilante is someone who "takes the law" into their own hands. And that's all you'll hear from me on that subject.

No one ever said who Reckoner should target...

Please dont regurgitate selective posts as your own. Especially without reading the page as a whole.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Let me clarify my post before I get attacked. To me, it looked like CoCo read this post:

Also, it

is

scummy for you to ask whether the vig is killing or not. He can claim any kills in the morning.

Meanwhile, knowledge of whether he is killing or not can help a potential scum roleblocker to decide whether he needs to target Reckoner at night or can afford to try and target someone he thinks might be a cop or doctor.

Seriously, people.

SHUT THE FUCK UP.

interpreted it as he felt, and regurgitated this information as his own in agreement. I might be the only one to see this, but it could either be scum looking to be part of the NS, or just someone who carelessly skimmed what was written, but wanted to appear as if they had payed close attention the whole time.

Time will tell

[stuntkeyboardist]

Nohandtyper, regardless of how you see it, I figured it wise to chime in on the topic before not doing so came back to bite me in the ass. Would you rather have me quote the STFU post? Furthermore, I KNOW no one said such things. However, discussing the role is not conductive in a scum hunt. I'd much rather analyze the players than play the odds. I'm sorry if my wording made you see more content than I gave.

I honestly don't care what the vig does. The role, if used wisely, helps the town, and I'm VERY pro town.

@DRK: I'm a nerd too! ^5

First off, wise to chime in when you're clearly wrong does not help you. You often will be better not saying anything than making it look like you arent actually paying attention. It came off as scummy to me (look above)... sorry.

Also, if you know no one said such things, why did you say they did?

Analyzing the player is part of the odds no matter how you look at it. It was a matter of pointing this out.

One more thing. "VERY" pro-town? Why would you think this wouldnt come off as scummy? I'm going to

FoS: CoCo

.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Looks like I wasnt the only one to feel the "VERY" pro-town thing in a different light. Sorry for reiterating it. Yet... it changes nothing...

[stuntkeyboardist]

Cripes [lobster], do you think I'm so blind as to not notice the scum tells you've given off?

Please share. We've discussed one thing regarding a simple misunderstanding, but I dont see anything more that lobster has done.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Reread his posts.
You'll see. I'm busy with Qax.

If you're going to call someone out as being scummy, CITE EVIDENCE! I've read his posts, I know his playing style. I dont see it as scummy. I want to hear why

you

find his behavior scummy.

Also, my FoS on CDB has been revoked. I now understand that when there is little activity, you do what you have to/see to advance the game. I realize that I too am starting some arguments, especially looking back on it. So either you're a really good scum player CDB, or you're just calling it as you see it since not many others will. Either way I am sorry for before.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Also:

(Thanks to the search feature of this site and looking for posts addressed to me)

@nohandedtyper

: I'm

extremely

insulted that you would question my integrity—

especially

when I've posted it across the site.

Take it or leave it. It's not like it's never happened before. If your really feel the need, I'm not insulted by a vote.

But we'll discuss when you return.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'd like to ask that everyone on the whole try to be more active, or if you can't, replace out.

QFT, it seems like there are only a few of us actually playing.

[stuntkeyboardist]

CoCo, please give concrete evidence as to why your suspect qax, wicked, and lobster. Telling us to go back and find it for ourselves is not being supportive by any means. like I said before CITE INFORMATION. And dont call Wicked out on his bad responses when yours are just as bad.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Let me add to my post to explain why you suspect DRK and myself as well. Damn, who

dont

you suspect?

More info please on your vote wicked. I understand from your above posts that you dont like CoCo, but it seems more like you're voting him because he's voting you. Not based on his suspects.

[stuntkeyboardist]

CoCo, please give concrete evidence as to why your suspect qax, wicked, and lobster. Telling us to go back and find it for ourselves is not being supportive by any means. like I said before CITE INFORMATION. And dont call Wicked out on his bad responses when yours are just as bad.

Missed this post. As I've said before, its a forum issue and I'm new to the site. If I had a way to flat out link posts I would not ask people to dig up the posts I refer to. I can only quote one at a time. I'm sure as I get used to the forums here, I will become a better player when it comes to software. For now, those of you familiar with these boards would do well to look into the allegations I bring.

Please trust me for now when I say I am pro-town. All I can do at this point is observe.

You could just say the number of the post... That's what I do a lot because I too dont like that there is no option to compile quotes. If they are important though, I just open the forum in a new tab and copy and paste as many quotes as I like. However you do it, even if it take a bit more time, I'd like to see what you're talking about instead of just saying "All of so and so's posts are scummy. Go look."

[stuntkeyboardist]

Not 'awhile'. I made mention of it once one or two RL days ago. I'm going to need at least another 36 hours to form a complete thesis. Suffice to say, at this point I feel Qax42 is leaning on the town side of neutral. I also feel he is being cautious to avoid a lynch. And its that confusing thought process that requires I take a bit longer to think about it.

It takes you 2.5-3.5 RL days to form an opinion of someone? You say you think he's "leaning on the town side of neutral." Is there some reason for that? If you need to think another 36 hours on it, you could at least give us some sort of reasoning or copy/paste a couple of his posts to give us some background on what you're thinking. In 36 hours time, we could have a whole plethora of opinions! "I'm thinking about it" doesn't tell us much.

QFT. Im not liking your playing style. It moved from, "just go re-read all of the posts," to "I dont know how to quote," to "I havent formed an opinion yet." It seems like you have nothing and are trying to avoid us noticing that.

SERIOUSLY

FoS CoCo

[stuntkeyboardist]

NHT, my playing style is certainly better than grasping at straws. DRK seems too settle on lynching anyone. How can you say that is better play?

I never said this. Go back and re-read, you'll see. I'm just sick of never getting any information out of you when you say you've got it. If you dont want people to suspect you, tell us the info that you've gathered. But if you're mad that I put an FoS on you, then you have problems my friend. I've asked you MULTIPLE times to respond by citing information. Doesnt matter how, but if you're going to accuse someone of being scummy, tell us why. I'm going to

unvote

for now. Dont think that I wont have my vote on someone for long.

Again, please explain why you think that Me, DRK, and all of the other people you have accused are scummy. I would love to know this. As far as I can see, you withholding information is far scummier than them actually trying to play the game.

[stuntkeyboardist]

NHT, showing is better than telling. Its not as though I'm inconsistent. DRK for example has been pushing for a quick lynch while trying to appear innocuous. Before you accuse me of not paying attention, perhaps you should heed your own advice.

As for you, I feel that you're waiting until the majority decides to lynch, in which case you'll vote and say, "Lol, I knew they were scum all along." Am I correct? Maybe not, but that doesn't mean I need to post about it.

In closing, it seems to me that those who push to draw as much info from as many people as you and DRK have (before the end of day 1) are the ones to keep an eye on.

First off, showing is better than telling? Ok, then show me.

I dont see how DRK has been pushing for a quick lynch. He has every right to vote you for avoiding answering our questions. I honestly feel that I should be voting you too. I'll give you one more chance though. Why do you feel that all of us are scum/scummy? BTW, I have been paying attention. You obviously havent because you dont know that we've been asking you for like 10 pages to respond to why you think people are scummy.

I dont understand why you even say your second paragraph. Why do I strike you as that kind of person and what do you mean, "that doesnt mean I need to post about it?"

I think lobster hit the nail on the head with this third subject.

Last chance. Answer the questions because I am right at the edge of voting you, and I am far from afraid to do so.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'm really tired right now, but does it feel sort of like this game stopped. We have so many people falling out of the game, there are very few posts of importance recently, and no one is really making cases anymore. C'mon people. We need action! People, let's step up!

[stuntkeyboardist]

Guys, I do apologize for being gone yesterday (I had graduation/party). But I will

vote: CoCo

. I gave you more chances than I give anybody, and as it has been pointed out, you still say nothing in your posts. I even said I would upgrade the FoS had you not responded reasonably. Either give actual reasons or be gone. I believe you are at L-1.

Also, hi quints! I hope you are able to/have caught up. Welcome to the game!

[stuntkeyboardist]

Okay,

unvote

. With the possibility of CoCo being Mafia Spy, I'd rather not have him at L1, but I also agree with CDB. I want answers. Please, for the love of God CoCo, just answer what was asked of you. You know, the same questions that have been asked for the past week (RT)...

No matter what you say or how you relate it to baseball, I still dont understand why you're trying to hold back useful information from the town.

[stuntkeyboardist]

xRx, can I just ask why you suspect both lobster and I? Just because we voted for you and CoCo doesnt mean that we're scum. I think it's easy to see that both were suspicious, and dont forget the fact that there were other people who voted for them too. Just because their vote wasnt on you or CoCo at L1, you're saying that they arent suspicious? I think you're being a bit narrow minded at the moment.

[stuntkeyboardist]

EBWOP: or wicked? You've never really voiced your opinion in any of the three of us, but you think we're scummy because we vote. Please explain.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Three people have been on every bandwagon. I've been pointing fingers at them for awhile now. Instead of thinking about it, you'd rather keep me in the hotseat? What gives?

Okay, I know that by responding I'm digging a bit of a hole here, but I have to anyway. Why is everybody saying that we bandwagoned. I thought we went over that if you have your own reasons and evidence against a person, yeah you vote the same as other people, but you arent jumping on someone just for the hell of it.

And CoCo, that quote serves two purposes here. I think the point is that you are accusing people with no evidence/proof. You've been 'pointing fingers' and that's just it. What we have all been continually asking is: why do you suspect us? I think it was DRK, lobster, wicked, and myself who you've accused with no evidence. And that was far before the whole 'bandwagon argument' or even the existence of this evidence. At least, that's what I've been asking.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Post 563 looks like ryan buddying with CDB.

FoS: ryan

Okay, I can generally see what you mean if you're looking at it from an 'agreeing' Pov, but I wouldnt call it buddying by far. CDB is an experienced player. He generally does have good points that I would say most people agree with. So IMO, ryan responding 'agreed' or anything of that nature is NOT buddying. And let's not forget the fact that he agreed with many of us as well. This really was, to me, just ryan catching up and stating his opinions on the topics presented.

Wicked, I used to just think you were a confused noob trying to make your way through the game, but that's becoming less and less apparent. I'm

FoS

ing you

wicked

[stuntkeyboardist]

Post 563 looks like ryan buddying with CDB.

FoS: ryan

Okay, I can generally see what you mean if you're looking at it from an 'agreeing' Pov, but I wouldnt call it buddying by far. CDB is an experienced player. He generally does have good points that I would say most people agree with. So IMO, ryan responding 'agreed' or anything of that nature is NOT buddying. And let's not forget the fact that he agreed with many of us as well. This really was, to me, just ryan catching up and stating his opinions on the topics presented.

Defending other people like this is scummy. Let him defend himself.

Just to be clear, I wasnt trying to defend Ryan as much as I was saying that Wicked's FoS on Ryan was a bit unreasonable. Yes it sounds like I was defending him, but when I made the post, that was not my intention.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Plus, IIRC, in the one game I did read of his (the one with lobster), he jumped around a bit with his vote (IIRC, he was actually cop in that game), so if nothing else, he seems to be following his meta.

Just to be clear on this, I was doctor. Not that it changes anything, but I like to have things very clear when it comes to anything on me. It helps with explanations later.

[stuntkeyboardist]

In reference to CDB's post above me:

And CoCo, if you believe that you've explained it and CDB has missed it, I will second the fact that you have never answered these questions. I have been waiting for these answers since you've stated them, yet have seen no evidence as to why you feel this way. Let's start with your accusations. Answer these and give EVIDENCE.

1) Why do you suspect lobstermania?

2) Why do you suspect DRK?

3) Why do you suspect me?

There. Three questions very clearly stated. Now you cannot say you never saw them.

[stuntkeyboardist]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 69#1741169
"Lol, I knew they were scum all along."

I didnt get what you meant by this the first time around, nor do I get it the second. Please respond (because you didnt before).

[stuntkeyboardist]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 02#1738002

Very good CoCo, you've found the first instance of it that didnt make sense. Not how about an explanation?

[stuntkeyboardist]

EBWOP:

NOW** how about an explanation?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Plus, IIRC, in the one game I did read of his (the one with lobster), he jumped around a bit with his vote (IIRC, he was actually cop in that game), so if nothing else, he seems to be following his meta.

Actually, to me, in my read, if your read on meta is correct, it seems against his meta. He, on multiple occasions, tried to let Coco off the hook, and laid multiple FOS's on him before actually voting him. He didn't seem to jump around at all, but only fencesit until the very last second.

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment, but I'll let NHT respond before I say anything.

What exactly are you asking me to respond to? I'll do my best, but if I dont cover it, let me know. If you're asking about my typical game, you will know that I tend to think things out and cover as much as I can with my posts. Look back (in either game), and you'll note that I try to cover all ground with my statements. I also do tend to be somewhat forceful with my votes. I like to have it placed most of the time on the person I find particularly scummy. Depending on the situation, I will also sometimes give people second hances before I place the vote (again, ceck either game).

Ryan, with CoCo, I placed 1 FoS as to my memory, but I was waiting to vote him until he answered my questions. Note that I was the one who initiated the "Why do you suspect lobster?" I too wanted that answer. But I was waiting for his reason. He seemed to have 'missed it' or to have 'not understood' it. So I kept waiting until I finally said 'Fuck it.'

As for his whole "plan." I think that was a load of shit. I honestly doubt that he noticed the voting pattern, and only looked back once it was mentioned. He seemed fairly confident that it was important, yet never bothered to mention it until after someone else did. By claiming cop, he can claim insanity by just making up his investigations. I believe MME or C_o was the first to recognize this. I thought it was a good point. To reiterate it would be to put a target on myself, just like most things that I could say would do. When I read through CoCo's wall last night, half of it didnt make sense to me, and the other half seemed like he re-read what he wrote and found a way to twist it to make him seem like it was his plan. On top of this, he;s suddenly become all high and mighty since he claimed and he feels like he's in control of the game. I think otherwise.

vote: CoCo

. Look everybody. Lobster and i are voting for the same person again! It's a conspiracy!


I agree with whoever said that all the quoting was/is getting annoying (I think it was CoCo actually. so I guess there is something we agree on after all). When I quote, I do so, so that the person I am responding to knows it. I expect it from others when they respond to something asked of them. I also expect it when they have evidence. But to have walls of quotes without context to just try and say "YOU'RE WRONG" is getting to be VERY tedious. Can we try to calm down a bit? As are the long posts (like this one).

By you guys (not all of you, I believe it was wicked who was enforcing it after Reckoner stated it) saying that I'm scummy along with DRK and lobster for being on the bandwagons. Yes, I can see why that might be important. But read our reasons. I was the last to place votes on both CoCo and I believe Reckoner. But I had my reasons and I think they were clearly stated. Since everybody is doing a re-read, you should all note this. Also note that I rarely reference anybody but who I plan on voting. Maybe this will be of importance to you guys.

Plus, I thought this was interesting, and to completely point fingers, check Wicked's other game. He is guilt of the exact same thing. Jumping on the bandwagons that lead to lynching. And he does it for less reason than CoCo gave when he was being suspected a few days ago. Just up and voted. So wicked, if you're going to accuse us and call out contradictions, remember that you've done the same.

My scum: CoCo, quints, wicked

Quints, unfortunately, you cant change what qax did. I'm not going to vote you or anything yet because of this. But I found qax very scummy and you're going to have to change that feeling he gave me.

Now I realize I'm not at the front of the line to be lynched, and typically this post is going to be pulled apart, but I feel that you guys need an explanation on everything. So I'm trying to say everything that's in my head at the moment while trying to cover what you want.

When D1 ends, regardless of when or who we lynch, the rest of the game should be over shortly.

So any question that has been asked of me:
Playstyle? check
Voting? check
CoCo? check
Bandwagons? check
Wicked? check
My feels on the game right now? check

This was my conscious stream of thought post. I hope I addressed everything you all wanted and more. Sorry about the lack of order. I'll be waiting for this to be torn up, taken out of context and used against me. Attack at will.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Oh, I also wanted to mention this before. Just because I vote the same as someone doesnt mean that we're scumbuddies. Either we're just wrong, feel the same way, or we're right. Whoever it was that said that DRK, lobster, and I are scumbuddies because we vote together and agree with each other... fuck you. Like I said before, I dont typically address other people unless I find them scummy or a question is asked of me.

For anybody who has played other games, let's note that scum often vote for scum as a coverup and only completely inexperienced scum will typically vote with one another. If you think it's scummy, maybe there is something more to you that got overlooked. Maybe you're scum... hint hint Reckoner/Wicked/CoCo.

Sorry that I sound like such an ass right now. Not exactly having a good day. So while responding, I'm also venting. But I honestly dont mean to come across as such a jack ass.

[stuntkeyboardist]

@NHT: I'm a little confused as to why you brought up Wicked's meta?

Sorry, this may sound stupid. What do you mean by meta?

[stuntkeyboardist]

@NHT: I'm a little confused as to why you brought up Wicked's meta?

I just threw in everything that was in my mind at the moment. I noticed this the day he brought up that we were suspicious for it, was going to comment, then found it useless to do so. Note that a lot of what I said in my long post wasnt what I would normally say or bring to the table. I just felt it was necessary to state everything that was in my mind.

But I guess what I was trying to say when I put it in there was that he's accusing us of doing something that's scummy, yet he does the same thing and feels it's alright. That doesnt exactly sit well with me. It's almost as if he's saying anything is okay when he does it, but when someone else does it and he has the chance to call them on it, they're guilty. It just bothered me a bit.

I normally wouldnt look at other peoples' games. I feel that one's playstyle should be judged based on the game at hand. But because everybody had that 'scum' read on him, some oddly stated posts, and the jump to agreeing on the "you're bandwagoning" accusations, I wanted to know if this was how he normally plays. Unfortunately it is. He was accused (and almost lynched) in his other game for his similar odd posts and awkward decisions.

Again, these are just the thoughts running through my head. If someone can take something from them, please do so. Right now I'm not in the mood to argue.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Question to NHT: How suspicious of lobster are you?

I'm not. He's on my possible scum list because he's been quiet, but that's all that I can hold against him at the moment. Without more evidence, I cannot place him, and I'm not lynching him for less active play than the rest of us.

Now from you Wicked, I want three solid reasons why you think he's the best lynching candidate. You're so forceful that he should be gone. Why? Just bullet your top three please.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually, I want to hear more from lobster, ryan, C_o, My Milked Eek, and CB. There's been a lot going on and we only get one post every once and a while from these players. How do you guys feel about the given situation?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Also, I am considering changing my vote to CB once I have heard lobster's defense.

What do you think of CB?

One more thing (sorry). Lobster's contribution has been more helpful then that of CB, and CB has acted scummier, so I am most likely going to change my vote when I hear lobster's defense, unless he says something strange.

First of all, thank you for your response about lobster. I understand your first two points (first is fact, second I cant really support), but I disagree with your third bullet. On the other hand I understand how others would feel that's scummy. I'll address my opinions on this in detail if you wish, but I think they're self explanatory.

Now for your question:

What do I think of CB?
In the beginning we had the whole voting thing. We all know how that went, so I'll move on from that point. After being accused then and finally recovering, CB has sort of died out. I was just looking back, and I saw that he seems to pop in every once and a while to give a "meh" post. You know, the "I'm here so dont replace me" post. They never say anything. The last point that CB made was against xRx trying to accuse him of more scummy behavior. However, we had already gone over the points and I feel safe in saying that I trust xRx's claim. I may be wrong, but that's a point to address in D2 after we have some info on our lynch, the night kill, and his possible night actions. I'm starting to get the feeling that he's playing under the radar, and just judging by the beginning of the game, I know that he would otherwise be a more vocal player had we not voted him. This leads to the question: Is he hiding something? Maybe he doesnt want to be accused again.

Another thing that I noticed was that he has not yet addressed the recent accusations against him. He just pops in and disappears for the rest of the day.

So, given the choice between CB and lobster, I would choose CB easily. However, this is not saying that lobster is innocent, just that I'm not suspecting him at the moment (which I addressed above). I'd like to hear MUCH more from each player.

Can I get a top three on why you suspect CB please?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Just a quick correction, I realize that I'm not suspecting lobster so much because he hasn't given us a lot to work with. At the same time, I'm suspecting CB moreso because he isn't speaking much.

The difference is that we know CB is pretty vocal, but that sort of died out after his recovery. Whereas lobster has been pretty consistent in his lack of posting.

What I'm trying to say is that my reasons arent contradictions. While similar, they apply to two different people with different posting personalities.

Again, I'd like lobster and CB especially to respond more, as well as the others. This game seems to keep turning into two people playing at a time.

[stuntkeyboardist]

First of all, thank you for your response about lobster. I understand your first two points (first is fact, second I cant really support),

Why do you feel that you can't support the second point?

I dont strongly feel he's linked himself to anybody. I mean, the only way that that could be true is by saying he voted the same as two of us. Otherwise, I see nothing else that specifically

links

him.

You also asked when he CB stopped talking. I think you're chart helps in this. As you notice, he was posting like 10+ times per day in the beginning. This was all through us voting him. His posting finally began to die down when the target changed and people took their votes off of him. The way I see it, he just doesnt want to draw more negative attention to himself so he doesnt get lynched. I'm almost considering changing my vote right now. I wasnt planning on revoting CB D1, even this morning I wasnt planning on it. But now that I've started looking back on it I do see what you mean. I'm gonna think about it and will decide within the next hour or so.

[stuntkeyboardist]

was that a long enough post for you?

kind of like No hand typer, I had to let it all out.

happy 4th of july.

Now go cut up my post.

No offense, but dont compare that to me. What you did and what I did were

not

the same at all.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I don't like NHT's bandwagon hopping. It seems to me he waits until someone has a lot of votes and then votes for them. His reasons are rarely explained in detail, and often contain deflections. Lately, this hasn't been the case, but as CDB pointed out, he revoted me without a sufficient explanation. Why would someone vote a claimed cop when there are several other suspects?

1: I had reasons for my votes. That's not bandwagon hopping.
2: Like I did for CDB and you (the second time)?
3: What deflections?
4: Because I felt like it/dont believe you...

Let me ask people if this is a sufficient explanation:

As for his whole "plan." I think that was a load of shit. I honestly doubt that he noticed the voting pattern, and only looked back once it was mentioned. He seemed fairly confident that it was important, yet never bothered to mention it until after someone else did. By claiming cop, he can claim insanity by just making up his investigations. I believe MME or C_o was the first to recognize this. I thought it was a good point. To reiterate it would be to put a target on myself, just like most things that I could say would do. When I read through CoCo's wall last night, half of it didnt make sense to me, and the other half seemed like he re-read what he wrote and found a way to twist it to make him seem like it was his plan. On top of this, he;s suddenly become all high and mighty since he claimed and he feels like he's in control of the game. I think otherwise. vote: CoCo. Look everybody. Lobster and i are voting for the same person again! It's a conspiracy!

I think it's a sufficient explanation. Part of the reason was that I wasnt explaining anything, but more giving my gut feelings and thoughts on things. I can use the same argument that has been used over and over: it's a gut feeling. I felt like your post was "a load of shit" and I felt you were the most scummy. I'm sure I'm not the only person who that way about your explanations though. Oh look! I wasnt.

Am I incorrect in thinking this smells like a WIFOM situation? I'd like NHT to make a post containing his thoughts on everyone much like CDB's post #708.

Uh... did you read my post? Or did you just read that paragraph that pertained to you? I tell who's scum, and I leave out who I dont think is scum.

Wicked, I think you're scum simply because much of your play has been strange. Granted, its not a real case against you. However, when shown a general agreement amongst players that Lobster is high on the scumdar, you jump in, defend him... and proceed to make a case against CB. Then, you say the two are linked. It makes no sense to me.

FOS: Wicked.

I semi-agree in the beginning, but at the same time, most of your posts "make no sense to me." If you think I'm scum, then vote for me. You accuse me of waiting to jump on a bandwagon after a few votes? I think that's what you're doing. You're hoping that your argument catches on before you actually do vote me.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Considering it stands to reason there are three scum players, I'm positive you, Lobster, and either NHT or Wicked are scum. Nearly identical voting patterns, strange logic, and dodgy answers come from all four of you.

Look who's talking about being dodgy!

[stuntkeyboardist]

Am I still being dodgy, NHT?

How about you actually give us some content?

I'd like NHT to make a post containing his thoughts on everyone much like CDB's post #708.

Note that my tone is meant to be casual. I'm not trying to sound negative, but one could read this post as that.

Let me state this differently. I'm probably one of the most active players in the game as a whole. I've given more content than most people (especially you). For you to say ^^that makes it seem like you werent paying attention at all. Is it true that you only play when something involving your name comes up!? oh wait... let's look back at the first 28 pages to see that you avoid answering everything that comes to you, let alone contributing to the game.

When I make a post about my gut feeling and things running through my mind, that's just it. I gave whatever reason I was going to give you. At the time, I felt that it was my best choice, and while I was considering CB, you arent helping that case.

Just for the record, it really is only you and CDB who have mentioned my vote. CDB passed it off a while ago, and I think you're only mentioning it because it's for you. Besides,

one

vote is not enough to lynch. Dont lose sleep over it.

[stuntkeyboardist]

1. The difference between you and me is that I gave reasons for everything I did and everything I was thinking about. To vote you based on my gut is much different. There as already the evidence on the table. Think of it as I just reinstated my vote from earlier.

2. voted

3. I never (and still dont feel) I need(ed) to defend myself. I voted you because I felt your wall of posts was complete bullshit leading me to believe that your claim was bullshit. I said this pretty clearly.

4. Yes I felt like it. Take it or leave it. I felt and still do that you're lying.

Again, someone said most of my posts are "seems like" and "feelings." If I can't get away with that shit, what makes you think you can?

Because I had reasons behind all of my 'gut feelings,' I had evidence against you, and I ACTUALLY STATED REASONS AT TWO SEPARATE TIMES WHY I WAS VOTING YOU.

Unvote

. FFS, NHT, you're on the bottom of my list. Watching you defend against such slight allegations is worthy of a laugh.

If I'm at the bottom of your list, why are you trying to call me out? That sentence, plus the fact that you voted and unvoted also doesnt sit well with me. My vote stays on you. Someone will have to mess up big time before I change it today.

Obviously, he was around long enough to post, but when asked to respond to a specific post he disappears...

I had this thing called a lunch break until 3... Note that with my last response I had 10 minutes to drive back to work. That's why disappeared.

[stuntkeyboardist]

1: How about I just say you're bullshitting?

2:What evidence?

3:The fact everyone seems satisfied with my explanations speaks volumes.

4: Please present this evidence you have, if for nothing other than the town's benefit.

3. I never (and still dont feel) I need(ed) to defend myself. I voted you because I felt your wall of posts was complete bullshit leading me to believe that your claim was bullshit. I said this pretty clearly.

5: Apparently, you're the only one that thinks so. By all means, show us why.

4. Yes I felt like it. Take it or leave it. I felt and still do that you're lying.

6: Cool, but I don't see any evidence. Please, point us to the posts that lead you to think I'm lying.

7: See above. I will not ask again.

8: Just because you're on the bottom of my list doesn't mean I'm not going to 'call you out.' To not do so would be bad play. Don't worry though, you're quickly rising to the top.

9: Okay. I'm from the US, and its Sunday evening here. Unless you work on Sundays, I can understand why you were away.

1: I'm not

2: Evidence for what exactly?

3: I dont know how you can say that two people is everyone. Most didnt even respond.

4: Again, evidence for what?

5: Show you why what? That I'm comfortable where I'm at in the game?

6: Is this the evidence that you're referring to? It's called an opinion. My opinion on your claim? It's bullshit. I vote, because in my opinion, you're lying.

7: I will not respond again, you can bet that for sure. I've covered every bullshit question you gave me.

8: True, but you jumped on me solely because I had a vote on you. This does not justify anything.

9: I'm from the US as well. Eastern timezone. I work on Sundays.

Damn I wish I could vote you again...

[stuntkeyboardist]

My evidence is everything that I said before I voted you the first time plus the paragraph that I posted the other day saying that I felt you were lying ((which is really my OPINION) which all leads back to the evidence that was down before you claimed). This is the evidence that's "on the table:" Your lack of answering questions. Your "I'm gonna be gone for a while." Your unexplained accusations. Your pointless posts. Your phony claim. Your lying plot that you've had this entire game. Your saying "I had that evidence (in regard to the 'scumbuddies' voting pattern that was conveniently brought up by Reckoner (I believe) like 4 hours before you said that that was your evidence (convenient huh? because you struggled for a week before this to come up with anything))." Your sudden increase in posting/accusations since you've claimed. Yes DRK was right that you're hiding behind your claim. He wasnt the only one to notice that, and by the huge increase in your posting, I'm sure that others have easily noted that too.

You're mixing up evidence and opinion. The evidence was all leading up to your wall of text. My opinion comes after that. You had no problem seeing the evidence before your claim (otherwise you wouldnt have attempted to address all of those points). My opinion comes in when I say that I dont think you're telling the truth. Again, that's MY OPINION. You're wasting your time attacking me for my opinion which you're getting confused with fact.

You know what? I dont want to hear from you again CoCo. I want to hear from the others. Have I made it COMPLETELY CLEAR why I voted for CoCo? I dont care if you agree with my vote or disagree, but do you see why I chose to? Have I laid it out well in the past two pages?

[stuntkeyboardist]

I said DRK posted that you were hiding behind your claim. If you're referring to the fact that I said that I'm sure the others have noticed too, well, that just implies that they havent made it known yet.

Your 'world is flat' analogy doesnt hold water. Otherwise you'd be saying that you see the evidence. In which case you shouldnt have asked for it. How about this one. Apples are fruit and grow on trees (fact). I dont like apples. I dont know why, I just dont (opinion).

I also never tried to have my opinions catch on.

Just for the record, I was never trying to start a bandwagon. If you look back, I was actually considering changing my vote from you.

If I'm so scummy, you should be voting me.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I said DRK posted that you were hiding behind your claim. If you're referring to the fact that I said that I'm sure the others have noticed too, well, that just implies that they havent made it known yet.

Yes DRK was right that you're hiding behind your claim. He wasnt the only one to notice that, and by the huge increase in your posting, I'm sure that others have easily noted that too.

Contradiction alert! What makes YOU so sure? This seems like a backpedal on your part. I had no idea you're capable of speaking for everybody. And let's not forget I get called out whenever I use 'everyone' instead of 'a couple other people.'

The problem here is that when I say "He wasnt the only one to notice that" I'm referring to myself. I also only say others. I never refer to the group as everybody because I know not everybody will feel this way. There is no contradiction.

CoCo, I'm honestly not afraid of your vote. I would easily prefer a game where people use their votes more often. This is how I play and how I've always played. Dont threaten me with your vote, then hold off saying "JK!" and threaten me again. Just do it.

***NOTE*** To DRK and everybody:
I have seen games where people go V/LA to avoid being asked questions. A way to hide from the stress of the game. Any time a person does this when there are questions at hand, I find it suspicious. I think I voiced that I felt it was suspicious quite clearly when qax disappeared.

[stuntkeyboardist]

NHT - Mentioning insane cop? In a mini? And you are using it as a possible reason to still be voting CoCo? REALLY? What of Coco's didn't makes sense? Your post where you vote Coco is WAY too vague to be construed as anything of a logical argument. Why do you find Qax scummy again?
What are you trying to prove from Wicked's meta thing? That he is playing to his meta? What was his role in the other games?

Is there no such thing as insane cop in a mini? I honestly dont know. This is only my third game on this site, and if insane cops dont exist in a mini, then I feel like an ass.

CoCo's argument didnt make sense to me because in my mind, it appeared as if he took arguments from people across the board, restated them, claimed them as his own, and called them a part of "plan" that he had all along but was never able to explain for 20 pages. Just the fact that you could see other peoples' arguments within it and him calling them his own was enough for me.

Let me set this straight. The post with all of my thoughts in it was not meant to be an argument on anybody. It showed where I stood on people, but I wasnt trying to use it for "concrete" examples. And yes, I was impulsive with that vote. I had no intentions of revoting CoCo when I started that post, but once I said I thought his post was crap, I thought 'Why not?'

I dont remember why I find qax scummy other than his convenient disappearance during his questioning.

I wasnt trying to prove anything. I said I noticed it, but wasnt going to use it. Do you know why? That's because I didnt know what good it could do. Maybe someone else could use it. I still gave my thoughts on it though.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Haven't heard a peep. NHT, why do you think people wouldn't admit to something like that? Surely, if people think I'm hiding behind my claim, they'd have pounced all over it.

That's fine. I guess others dont feel that way. Doesn't change how I feel though.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Honestly, I'm sort of disappointed that I'm changing my vote, but wicked was on my scumlist as well. I would have been happy with his or CoCo's lynch, but since nobody else sees CoCo how I do, I guess if you cant beat 'em, join 'em.

unvote

vote: wicked

...my first hammer...

[stuntkeyboardist]

CoCo, prove me wrong tonight. I'm not opposed to completely apologizing. But be smart.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Honestly, I'm up in the air about CoCo's response. I asked the mod about insane cops in a mini... the answer is yes. So by the time we find out if he's sane or insane, we'd pretty much be at the end of the game.

[stuntkeyboardist]

One thing to keep in mind in re-reading is understanding why the mafia left Reckoner alone. It suggests to me that he didn't have any scum at the very top of his list.

I'd say DRK has that answer down. If there is a doctor he would most likely protect one of the claimed leaving it open for the scum to kill anybody else.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Yup, I would make it that obvious.

[stuntkeyboardist]

During the night I investigated DRK. I did so instead of NHT or Lobster because I knew there was a large chance of Reckoner taking one of them out during the night.
It doesn't matter though, because I received no results. Now, before you all get up in arms and think I lied about my claim, here me out.

There is obviously a pro-scum roleblocker. By blocking me during the night, it leads to the town thinking I'm not the cop. Who do I think is the pro-scum roleblocker?

Vote: NHT.

He's the one that raised a stink about my claim being bullshit. Then, he hammers Wicked and tells me to prove him wrong during the night. This leads me to believe he'd planned to roleblock me and push the town onto his agenda.
Combine this with the other suspicious things he's done, and I am beyond certain he's the prime lynch candidate for today.

You can all lynch me if you're unsure, but I'm not bullshitting my claim.

It actually seems like you've over thought this. Almost anticipating this to happen. Yes, I know by saying this, I will be targeted even more because you almost imply that I will do this, but how do we know this wasnt

your

plan? Or even the scum roleblockers (if it isnt you). Look at it logically, why would I make such a big deal to draw attention to myself to the point that people would consider me to lynch, only to hammer, conveniently say prove me wrong, then roleblock you? I trick a lot of people playing these games and typically will have a plan or two, but I guarantee this is not it. If one little thing were to happen differently, the plan wouldnt have worked and I would have put a huge target on my back for nothing.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I also wanted to address the quints situation. Since confirmingin, these are all of quints' posts:

xRx, can I just ask why you suspect both lobster and I? Just because we voted for you and CoCo doesnt mean that we're scum. I think it's easy to see that both were suspicious, and dont forget the fact that there were other people who voted for them too. Just because their vote wasnt on you or CoCo at L1, you're saying that they arent suspicious? I think you're being a bit narrow minded at the moment.

This seems overly defensive to me; The same 3 people on 3 bandwagons is worth looking into.

vote: nohandtyper

It may seem over defensive, but I was only asking why he suspected us, and my take on the situation. A vote is very unnecessary.

Post 563 looks like ryan buddying with CDB.

FoS: ryan

Okay, I can generally see what you mean if you're looking at it from an 'agreeing' Pov, but I wouldnt call it buddying by far. CDB is an experienced player. He generally does have good points that I would say most people agree with. So IMO, ryan responding 'agreed' or anything of that nature is NOT buddying. And let's not forget the fact that he agreed with many of us as well. This really was, to me, just ryan catching up and stating his opinions on the topics presented.

Defending other people like this is scummy. Let him defend himself.

Again, I wasn’t defending him so much as saying that I don’t agree with wicked.

4 pages later…

I'll be V/LA til Monday.

Odd…

Back, catching up.

But only one post before the lynch which occurs 4 pages later…

I don't like the fact that Wicked seems to have become the inevitable option. I'm honestly not seeing him as particularly scummy.

Why not give more info? You’re acting like a couple of other people this game. “I think they’re scummy, but I wont really say why” or in this case “I don’t think they’re scummy, but I wont say why.”

Coco and reckoner, let's here your night actions.

Okay

Honestly, I'm sort of disappointed that I'm changing my vote, but wicked was on my scumlist as well. I would have been happy with his or CoCo's lynch, but since nobody else sees CoCo how I do, I guess if you cant beat 'em, join 'em.

unvote

vote: wicked

...my first hammer...

For the pre-claim hammer:

vote: nohandtyper

Is this just another excuse to vote the only person who still thinks qax’s play was scummy?

One thing to keep in mind in re-reading is understanding why the mafia left Reckoner alone. It suggests to me that he didn't have any scum at the very top of his list.

Very obvious answer. It was actually posted right above you. Stop throwing in useless info. Most (if not all) of you will probably disagree, but quints is becoming my 100% candidate along with CoCo. Yeah I know they're the two people voting me, but look back at day one, it was no surprise that I thought they were scum then either.

FoS: CoCo, quints

Not that anyone will care...

[stuntkeyboardist]

Okay, this is going to be a very long post. This is my going through the entire game, recapping, and explaining my feelings on my, and others’, actions. I’ve changed it a bit though. It was originally just for my reference after I was asked why I suspected qax but couldn’t remember, but I’ve been asked many things and been accused of many things. Some of which I did purposely avoid, others I just couldn’t explain to the person asking. I’ll do my best to cover everything. I also realize that I will be called out on every detail I forgot and every detail that I mentioned. It sucks (especially since I didn’t primarily write this for you guys), but I know it’ll happen. Since I will probably be lynched today, I feel that I should at least go out with my opinions for you guys to work with (considering that if wicked doesnt kill scum, the game is over anyway and it wont even matter).

Pgs 1-4
The first thing I see to address is CB’s vote/unvote/revote thing. At the time, yes, I thought it was scummy. Looking back at it now, it doesn’t seem like anything groundbreaking other than a simple mistake. I’ll give it that saying he had no plan but saying he had a plan a few posts later was odd. But I can pass this off as a simple mistake. He’s more or less coming across as someone who’s just playing to have some fun. Not to get into ridiculous arguments or minor miscommunication. But soon after, lobster jumps in for the first time in two pages to say he’s giving CB an FoS for trying to fit back in. My vote I feel should not have come. Sorry CB. Looking back I don’t think you were as scummy as I originally felt. Part of it is that you don’t appear very scummy through the rest of the game.

Pgs 4-5
At this point, qax shows up for the first time since his random. CDB votes lobster for no reason at all except that he isn’t voting yet. Then MME jumps in to say that he lost his connection and needs to catch up. Sound familiar? I then get accused of putting words in lobster’s mouth when I say I disagree with CDB. Still not sure why that was such a big deal. I just interpreted it my way and said how I felt about it. CDB says we should be voting at all times during D1. Which caused lobster to vote CB, which in turn caused many people to vote for lobster. Then for some recap/vote talking. Nothing significant. MME returns for the recap. More votes for CB for his odd voting and explanation for it.

Pgs 5-8
CoCo first states that “I've gathered a bit of information on the logic of some of the other players.” But refuses to explain what he’s found. Wolf pops up with nothing important. We talk for almost a page about CBs voting conundrum. I feel like an ass for how I responded to CB. Sorry. Then came the whole “is lobster lurking” argument, which I found to be yet another twist of words.

Pgs 8-9
Wolfram starts to get called out on his antics. He never actually voices an opinion that wasn’t already stated. He gets called out on it. I voted CDB. He was acting very aggressive to attack someone. Then MME comes back yet again to give his two cents before disappearing again. I know I passed off my argument on CDB, but looking back… he was really aggressive on attacking people. Post 207 remains. Every time he references someone, he asks questions about how they feel on “his” case against someone or other questions of the sort that acknowledge that he’s starting all of these. Here’s Reckoner’s “trap” post. I still don’t know why you would try this. The point behind it makes sense, but it was so horribly executed that I don’t feel peoples’ suspicions on you were unjustified.

Pgs 9-10
Post 216. Wicked finally jumps back in to unvote and FoS 3 people by just restating other peoples’ arguments. I agree with CDB that Wicked’s justification of withholding information is NEVER good, but then DRK does a PBP on CDB which makes me want to reconsider his status in the game. DRK is solidifying his (in my mind) town status. Right now I feel he’s the only one who isn’t guilty of much anything (other than voting for people). He goes back and looks at wicked’s post where he FoS’d three people. I just realized that wicked did this by hopping on our bandwagons, then accuses us 20 pages later of bandwagon hopping… Interesting. CB then states that he will be gone for a few days. I don’t think I was one of the people (surprising) to have said something about this, but if I was, I’m sorry. Evidence piles against Reckoner’s “trap” and his trying to explain it away. I’m passing it off as a mistake for two reasons. 1) He claimed and I believe him. 2) He hadn’t made any other mistakes than defending a bad idea. Qax finally jumps back into the game after pages of being gone again. Qax and MME go back and forth effectively covering nothing but ironing out how they feel about one another through arguing. I come in and FoS reckoner. I agreed with the arguments against him, and I too felt the whole situation was a bit odd (which I still do, but can pass off).

Pgs 11-14
Qax, wicked, and CoCo seem to be coming up a lot. Mainly for feeling holding back info is alright or not being as active. Another thing was the mention of the N0 cop and role fishing (haha, that wasn’t hard with two claims now). Lobster pops back up before we have an entire page of N0 cop discussion and Reckoner accusations. Nothing groundbreaking. MME then says he will be gone again. I’m not liking his constant disappearing. Looking at other games, scum tend to do this to avoid accusation. Even if this isn’t the case, he’s very unhelpful in doing this. Qax tries to brush off anything that was brought up on him. Reckoner gets angry. Not big and green and angry… just angry. He’s put at L-1 and claims. I do believe his claim. It’s specific, plus I can see his mistake and how badly we blew it out of proportion. CDB then pushes to vote wolfram. Qax still wants to lynch reckoner. I expect Reckoner to kill N1 to confirm his role since he apparently cannot be roleblocked. Wolfram, lobster, and MME come back again. Qax says that Reckoner’s claim is too convenient. Reckoner’s 330 on wicked is very good. Many good points brought up. Wicked claims to have fallen behind even though he’s been active in his other games. Qax goes V/LA when there are questions for him a few hours after acknowledging the fact that there were questions for him. This is why I think it’s scummy. As I’ve said, I don’t like it when people disappear for opportunistic reasons. He later comes back saying it was because he moved to a different country and cannot play. That’s a pretty big move. I doubt anybody would sensibly play a time consuming game like this when they know they wont have time to play. It’s not a spur of the moment decision to move to a new country. Wicked is still catching up. When players do this, they report on old information that people don’t take into as much account. I get called out on my decision to vote qax.

Pgs 15-18
Talk arises about how the Reckoner claim should be handled. After MME bringing up that if there is a vig, that he should kill Reckoner based on his claim, I hope this happens. Otherwise, I hope Reckoner is the vig and makes a good kill. Lobster then calls me out on qax. Even now I find it scummy. CoCo still avoids… everything. Yet he tries to be active. Wicked is still catching up… This is when he finds me suspicious. Wicked finally caught up. Says he has no information on me. He will later say that he noticed my voting patterns all along. Either it was a lie, or he was holding back info from the town. Either way, I don’t like it. Then it’s the whole statistical discussion on whether Reckoner should kill or not. I hope he does. Odds are in our favor. If only slightly. C_o disappears along w/ MME. Something about 394 bothers me. CDB tells us to stop talking about odds because of roleblockers. It’s a little later for that thought. But I don’t know, it just doesn’t sound… pro-town in tone. CoCo votes wicked, I initially don’t see why. I do understand better now. He is right about something not being right about qax. I want to know what exactly makes him feel this way. CoCo claims to be VERY pro-town. Rubs me the wrong way as it does to many other people. Not worthy of my vote yet, but someone to watch for a while. Has no info in his posts. He claims to have evidence yet posts none. I’ve extremely insulted qax’s integrity. Cry me a river. DRK calls out wicked for not posting. Neither has wolfram, lobster, MME, C_o. Wicked is again catching up. This is really annoying me because he just posts old info. Not surprised if he’s just reposting what someone else said. He finally does catch up, questions CoCo, and CoCo again avoids answering. Instead, he just accuses wicked. Some talk about how to quote/cite… blah blah blah.

Pgs 19-24
CoCo is questioned repeatedly as we ask for information. This has been going on for three pages now and we still have none. He says he needs a few more days to form his opinion on someone. I give CoCo another chance. I tell him to respond or I vote. He calls me out for being active, which makes it seem like I know something he doesn’t. Lobster pops in again to claim limited access. C_o pops back in. Reckon calls out CoCo for “parroting” his case on wicked. Qax now drops out. Some minor discussion about replacements. MME pops back in to say he’ll be gone. CoCo tries to explain, but nothing really comes up other than “I knew that,” “I was thinking that,” “I was building a case.” DRK calls out CoCo’s post and notes that he’s only accusing people who have accused/attacked him first. I come back after graduation, vote CoCo. He spews some more non-helpful information. CB comes back and just bandwagons. All out bandwagons. Finally everybody has seemingly come back except MME. One vote away from hammer, CoCo claims. Seems legit at first. It has the right amount of flavor and is specific enough. Reckoner brings up both votes that led to calims. NHT, DRK, lobster. All on these. CB calls Reckoner’s contradiction about not want to lose CoCo, but is willing to hammer. Almost seems they could be linked. It would be a stretch, but very possible. I get called on being defensive to Reckoner’s argument by quints as well as being accused on rejecting perfectly good evidence by CDB. I don’t see how it was perfectly good. The only person I completely trust right now is DRK and he was on all of those too. CoCo is called out YET AGAIN!!! And says nothing. A bit of catch-up, nothing groundbreaking again. CoCo claims that he saw our voting pattern first because he’s been pointing fingers at us. No evidence then or now. No reason to believe him. CDB says that the three of us being on bandwagons is not a scumtell, but still had previously FoS’d me for saying that the argument doesn’t point out scum. Contradiction. Reckoner gives info on the lobster situation. Uses many posts as evidence. He has a good point, but lobster doesn’t post an excessive amount. Not a lot of info on him. The post though, gives CoCo more to work with. MME comes back… says nothing but that he’ll be gone again until tomorrow.

Pgs 25-29
CoCo does an excessive post restating information already presented in the game and calling it part of his plan. On top of this, it is all based on the assumption that DRK, Lobster and I are linked. If one of us flips town, we would all flip town, and vice-versa. I still want an explanation for this:

As for you, I feel that you're waiting until the majority decides to lynch, in which case you'll vote and say, "Lol, I knew they were scum all along." Am I correct? Maybe not, but that doesn't mean I need to post about it.

. DRK argues, I agree, CB pops in again. I bit of catch up, some arguing, and wicked returns with a slew of posts and information. Does a PBP of lobster, assumes the same that DRK, Lobster, and I are linked. Votes lobster. I still don’t see how the three of us voting the same means we’re scum. More arguing. I’m tired, annoyed (bad day) and let it all out. I just throw down everything in my head. IT WAS NOT MEANT TO BE EVIDENCE FOR ANYTHING. Just what I was rolling over. I posed my three scum suspects. Happy for a lynch of any of them. We talk more about lobster. The evidence piles as DRK, Lobster, and I state that we don’t exactly find each other scummy, which in turn made the three of us look scummy… Wicked goes back and forth on lobster and CB. Odd considering the effort he put into his lobster case to jump to CB (where there was almost no case). We talk to try and get info. I accept it, but still don’t see anything solid. CB steps up his posting since he’s being considered as a suspect. Only time he steps it up since the beginning of the game when he was being suspected. I didn’t like this, because it appeared he was trying to dodge the spotlight in between his accusations. Then lobster pops in for a nice long discussion. Wicked is posting a phenomenal amount. I’m sort of surprised since he kept on falling behind. Wicked changes his vote because of lobsters defense. I don’t feel that has anything to do with CB being scummy. I think CB should be voted for being scummy, not because lobster isn’t.

Pgs 29-end
This is the whole CoCo vs. NHT argument. You guys decide on this. I thought it was pretty well explained. CB jumps in to give his stance on the situation in another huge post. As CoCo and I argue, it appears everybody else ignores it and plays the game without us. Starting to feel that I should just feel how I feel about CoCo and he should feel how he feels about me. Nobody else cares anyway. Noticed wicked’s votes piling up. Far from against a wicked vote. He was one of my suspects. Good points were brought up to imply scum status, and I had my own feeling on him. I try to hold off because to vote him now would be to cut my throat (for bandwagoning). Plan to hammer if it comes to that. The insane cop in a mini thing comes up. I checked, there are insane cops in minis. Making CoCo’s role potentially worthless if he wasn’t lying. But there is no way to prove that he’s lying anymore. Just going to look at him as a regular player instead because there are many ways around the cop claim. I hesitated on hammering because wicked was “catching up” AGAIN. Found it opportunistic trying to delay.

Yeah, yeah, I’ll take hell for hammering. Who wouldn’t, especially with my D1? But that’s one down hoping for a scum. Wicked had plenty of time for defense…. You know, like the PAST THREE DAYS.

So Wicked turned up town. Oops. Cant change it now. Sorry guys, sorry wicked if you’re still bothering to follow. I’m assuming my head is on the chopping block today. Not completely opposed to it either. By having proof of my alignment, you’ll know a ton about the other players as well. Right now, I seem to be linked to most people by votes, accusations, suspicions… etc. My death would prove a lot. If you do decide to kill me, at least you know where I stand on everything.

NS:
DRK
Reckoner
lobster

Scum:
Wicked
Wolfram => ryan
Qax => quints

Possible Scum:
CDB
CB (leaning toward scum)
MME
CoCo (another chance N1)
C_o

[stuntkeyboardist]

Quints, the scum didnt target the vig for the same reason they wouldnt target the cop. You even quoted the post that explains that. Just switch out cop for vig and you have your answer

[stuntkeyboardist]

Ok, I was wrong, DRK never says the word cop, but why did they leave Reckoner alone?

"I'm guessing the scum were afraid of a doc protection. If we do have a doc, he's more or less limited to trying to save our exposed power roles and doing his best not to be killed. That would give the scum a chance to kill anyone else they wanted. "

[stuntkeyboardist]

But they chose to role-block the cop and the vig. That gives us information.

I dont understand this at all. Only the cop was role-blocked (if that's even true). The vig wasnt (he killed lobster). And what information could that possibly give us if they were both role-blocked?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry, I meant they chose to block the cop

instead

of the vig, suggesting Coco was more correct in his suspicions than reckoner.

It could just mean that tey know Reckoner wouldnt kill scum, and that would make sure CoCo wouldnt be able to confirm anybody's role. Which could also be used to throw me under the bus.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'm just looking at this from a logic PoV. If we get three town again tonight (lynch, vig, scum kill), the scum win. Because tomorrow wit would be 3 town v 3 scum. So if we lynch town tonight, I would highly advise people to think hard about night actions. That being said, I have a question for everybody. This is not in defense of myself, this is just an open question. Since I'm probably next to be lynched, what would you think if I flip:

a) scum?

b) town?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Starbuck, page 36, post 881 is a post of me recapping the game as I saw it. Of course it's flooded with opinion and rationales, but it outlines the pages that events occurred on (so you can find the events easily if you want to look back at it) and it also contains no quotes. Sorry that it's kind of messy. It wasnt really meant for anybody but me before I decided to post it.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I just looked over my long post... in the first paragraph, last line, replace wicked with reckoner. It's pretty important that that mistake be fixéd

[stuntkeyboardist]

vote: MME

why? because I felt like it.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Well, nothing's happening. Gotta do something to spark some conversation.

[stuntkeyboardist]

My vote for MME was completely random out of the RVS. So yes, I would say it's pseudo-random. I was hoping it would spark

something

to get D2 rolling. As far as how much I suspect him, it's really only based on the fact that he disappears so often. I guess I do have some suspicion of him, maybe not enough for a credible vote/argument, but I wont say I think he's innocent.

It really bothers me (if you couldnt tell already) when people play the "I'll be gone/catching up" game. Because regardless of whether they're scum or not, they arent helping and are hurting the town either way.

If you dont have time, dont play people!

[stuntkeyboardist]

On that thought...

I will be V/LA from Monday, July 13 through Wednesday, July 15 and possibly into Thursday. I probably won't post at all during that time.

Hahaha nice... but at the same time, you've played a lot so far, so I really cant hold anything against you. I was mainly referring to the people who sit in the shadows while the game goes on, only to post once a page to say they wont be here for a while.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Thank you Starbuck for making such an effort to catch up. It's nice to have someone playing who's actually active and looking to play.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Nohandtyper

Why did you hammer without a claim? I understand that Day 1 took forever. I would hope the mod realizes this and sets a deadline for the following days. It just contradicts everything that you argued against.

The reason that hammered without a claim was that, for the entire time wicked was playing, it never seemed that he played it straight. I was never confident that he was town and had him on my possible scum/scum list the entire game. When it finally came to L1, he was still "catching up." To me, when you say this even though you know you have quite a few votes at the time and are under suspicion (especially at this time) you make the effort to read the three pages and back yourself up. Instead it was a neverending "I'm catching up" which really bugged me. I wasnt going to wait for him for another few days before he actually defended himself. Since he was on my scum list for the entire game though, it would have taken A LOT of explaining from him to change my mind.

Just a quick note, I work Sundays. I have lunch from 2-3, so sorry my response didnt come earlier.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry MME, I thought I

unvote

d before. While I would greatly appreciate more posting (stress on the greatly), I dont think you're the best lynch candidate today/at the moment. I simply picked a person at random when I did that to try and spark some convo. But I explained this already.

[stuntkeyboardist]

CB, first you say this:

@ MME: I understand that it might be busy, and its not just you, but I dont want people to sit on the sidelines during this game, because thats an easy way for scum to slip by.

You aren’t really accusing him of anything.

Then I say this:

vote: MME

why? because I felt like it.

Do you notice that I give explanation and reason to EVERYTHING!? To just say “because I felt like it" is so out of character of me. If I had actually wanted him gone, I would have made a case against him, but even that is sorta risky in my position. It would look like shifting the blame.

Later, I say this:

My vote for MME was completely random out of the RVS. So yes, I would say it's pseudo-random. I was hoping it would spark

something

to get D2 rolling. As far as how much I suspect him, it's really only based on the fact that he disappears so often. I guess I do have some suspicion of him, maybe not enough for a credible vote/argument, but I wont say I think he's innocent.

It really bothers me (if you couldnt tell already) when people play the "I'll be gone/catching up" game. Because regardless of whether they're scum or not, they arent helping and are hurting the town either way.

If you dont have time, dont play people!

If you look back to my recap, numerous times I say that I don’t like people “sitting in the shadows” is how I think I put it. MME is one of these people that I reference. While my vote at this point was completely random (gave everybody a number 2-10, rolled two dice), I have already said MME was doing this. If anything, you’re “buddying” with me after what I posted the day before.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Speaking of people sitting in the shadows...

Mod, can we have a prod on quints? And could we possibly shorten the time between prods from 3 days to 2? People are far more than taking advantage of that this game.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'm going to try to be polite here, but MME, stop referring to me as

nhtscum

I have not been lynched, nor have you made a case against me that could logically explain why you feel this way. To me it seems like a reiteration that I have a couple of votes on me and that people should be voting me.

Make a case and maybe I could see this differently.

[stuntkeyboardist]

DRK has been catching my eye for awhile now.

Mind if I ask why?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Just to get the ball rolling a bit, I'd like to ask everybody for a list of your scum v. town players. This should at least stir the pot.

Scum:
CB (You're beginning to make too many mistakes)
quints (didnt like your predecessor's actions, and I'm not liking yours)
CoCo (Still not believing your claim)
ryan (I'm not sure where to place you right now, but leaning more toward scum)

Town:
DRK (not a fan of your reasoning on the Starbuck vote though)
Starbuck (either you're really good at covering your predecessor's tracks, or you're pro-town. I'm thinking the later)
Reckoner (I believe the claim)
MME (While he doesnt post much and disappears often, I think he could be town)

[stuntkeyboardist]

That's fine MME. two very different timezones. You're pretty much posting while I'm asleep and vice-versa.

While I did put CB on my scum list, your reference to his post 65 really stood out to me. One of the three had to be scum, but to not go after that third person, the ONLY ONE LEFT, of your definite scum strikes me as a bit odd. I really would like to know where you stand on that CB. I'm far from against your lynch today.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I haven't gotten a solid read on the Kitty today.

Doesnt matter what you got today. His role doesnt change. What;s your read on him based on the game as a whole?

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'm not gonna lie, it feels like everybody's given up on this game.It's a shame too. Quints, I want a post from you now. You said a few days ago that we would get one later.

Vote: quints

I'm getting sick of it. Actually play.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Mod, I really think we need a change of the prod rule

[stuntkeyboardist]

I know I have my vote on quints, but I'm not against a CB lynch today. To be fair though, I didnt read his rationale on the previous page yet. I have to go to work and will read it when I get home before I decide to change anything.

And yes Reckoner. If we lynch town, either you better be sure who you are lynching tonight, or dont lynch at all. Cant make that choice for you, but if another town dies, it's game over.

Whats LyLo? Never heard this before.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Ok, so I did in fact read CB's long post last night, and I'm not gonna lie, I was playing the Sims 3 instead of responding (kid I babysit gave it to me as a gift because I've been dying to play it). Sorry. Anyway, I didnt really see too much content in it. To me it was more of a "let me re-explain what I already failed to do before." Yet you, CB, re-explained nothing. CB is starting to head to the top of my list right now. I would vote on the general consensus here.

I wasnt a huge fan of ryan's post though either. First thing, we commented on you (ryan), MME, and quints as being suspicious for not responding very much. Since then, MME has stepped up the posting. But at the same time, everything he's posted has given a pro-town read. not the same with you and quints. And dont exclude quints btw. Both of you are on a very fine line it appears (quints moreso for me). What I liked was how you tried to throw him under the bus when you two are playing a seemingly similar game.

I also dont see how DRK's rationale for the block is "inside information." If that's what you call logic, then we're all guilty.

My next subject to address is you asking CB if he's even reading the thread. First of all, he's been here this whole time. The up in his posting is still something I find a bit scummy, but he's still been addressing a lot of the points (at least, moreso than you) that have come up. You have no room to talk here.

But I do agree about your next Reckoner quote. It would be nice to have a bit more info on that.


As for CoCo, sorry, but ryan is right. I still do find you suspicious. Check my list on the other page. With that said though, you can note that I'm not voting you right now.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Unofficial Vote count:

nohandtyper - 1 (qwints)
quints - 1 (NHT)
CB - 2 (MME, CoCo)
Starbuck – 1 (DeathRowKitty)
Ryan - 2 (reckoner, Starbuck)

Not voting:
ryan2754, canadianbovine

CoCo, you need to unvote if you'd like to vote for ryan.


I'd honestly like ryan and CB to vote. I'd like to see where they stand on all of this. Where do you guys think is the best place to put it...?

[stuntkeyboardist]

DRK, I too have been having the SK idea running through my head. Both his and CoCo's claims have a backup plan if they are anti-town. One thing I would have to disagree on is that I dont think Reckoner would kill lobster with the idea that he's town. Reckoner (if he is SK) would know better than to kill town at any stage of the game because he can win with a majority town (by eliminating them), but if scum gain majority, it's an automatic GO.

So I have given it the thought lately, but here's the conundrum:

He thinks lobster's town: it would be stupid for both the SK and the vig to kill him
He thinks lobster's scum: it would benefit both SK and vig to kill him.

Same outcome, two very different roles. Something to think about.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Let me also say that I think DRK has some really interesting points on Reckoner. Something else to look at.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I figure a pro-town role would feel more pressure not to go after potential townies than a neutral role would.

This is true, and Reckoner does seem to jump to things pretty quick (seemingly without thinking things through), but I still think my point on tis was fairly obvious.

To everything else that was posted, I read it quickly, I dont have time to respond at the moment, but I dont think anything monumental happened. I think Ryan did a decent job dealing with what has happened, and the only thing I really feel I should note on that is that I only reworded what lobster said. I felt CDB just misinterpreted, and to accuse someone on their misinterpretation I felt was wrong. Sorry that everybody seemed to find me in the wrong, but dont expect that help if you guys ever need it.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I'd also like to hear from quints just as I have been waiting for since he started playing.

And sorry for my lack of posting, I have been really busy lately. I have still been reading everything and you can expect a lot more from me on Monday, but until then, I'm goingto be doing generally shorter posts. Reason: I've been doing job training for a few months now (I know, ugh), and things are starting to wrap up before we actually start. So that means, that I will only be able to respond during five min breaks and lunch today and tomorrow and monday night (and yesterday). Sorry about this.

[stuntkeyboardist]

CB, it sounded like you quoted your PM, and you know you cant do that. But anyway, i do believe your claim (for now). It was pretty specific, so I have no reason to doubt you at the moment. Thus, my vote will remain on quints. Of anybody that I wanted to lynch (minus CB), quints has stayed at the top and I would like to see his lynch today. Sorry quintsy.

[stuntkeyboardist]

CB, it sounded like you quoted your PM, and you know you cant do that. But anyway, i do believe your claim (for now). It was pretty specific, so I have no reason to doubt you at the moment. Thus, my vote will remain on quints. Of anybody that I wanted to lynch (minus CB), quints has stayed at the top and I would like to see his lynch today. Sorry quintsy.

what exactly has qwints done?

Have you been paying attention at all?

Not only have both (qax/quints) been lurking (yes, I accuse them of lurking, sue me), but neither have had a very solid play here. Especially quints. Did you read my post when I posted everything that quints said this entire game? Here it is: viewtopic.php?p=1758754#1758754 It amounted to 1) bullshit, 2) accusing/voting me without reason. They've both conveniently been gone when important questions have been brought to the table for them; as if to answer would slash them with 1000 paper cuts and dip them in a vat of acid.

I will rally behind quints' lynch today.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry quintsy.

Does anyone else get a strange vibe by this? Especially after his 1082 response?

Sorry if you get a strange vibe by this, but I was just getting annoyed that he hasnt done ANYTHING this game. Especially being a replacement because, you know, I'd think a replacement would WANT to play. I didnt mean anything other than the fact that I am all for his lynch (kinda wanting to be a jerk about it I suppose).

If that wasnt an explanation for it, then maybe I just dont understand what you mean.

At the same time, I'm still not feeling the scum vibe from DRK. I mean, sure, it was stupid to vote Starbuck based on that, but I thought he explained his reasoning well enough (again, still dont agree with it though). And as for the fence-sitting, I do feel he's just being more cautious knowing what we have to do. I got a very pro-town vibe from D1, so it would take a bit more than that to change my mind on him.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry quintsy.

No offense taken. I just really haven't had a lot to say about the game. Coco's claim is most likely legit and, I'm not sure about reckoner's. NHT still strikes me as very likely to be scum, CB's scum-slip about the number of scum has attracted my vote because it's an easy mistake to make.

I'm sorry, but you're honestly telling me that you have NOTHING to say about this game? There has been a lot going on that you have not yet responded to. How about the fact that you're being voted?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry quintsy.

No offense taken. I just really haven't had a lot to say about the game. Coco's claim is most likely legit and, I'm not sure about reckoner's. NHT still strikes me as very likely to be scum, CB's scum-slip about the number of scum has attracted my vote because it's an easy mistake to make.

I'm sorry, but you're honestly telling me that you have NOTHING to say about this game? There has been a lot going on that you have not yet responded to. How about the fact that you're being voted?

^^Much better

[stuntkeyboardist]

Quick response:
Would have been better if you checked Reckoner's role to be honest.

Why did you decide to check Coco and not reckoner, whose role was more under suspicion of being an sk?

And could you post some flavor? DON'T quote.

Okay, before a hammer, I will

unvote

.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Quick response:
Would have been better if you checked Reckoner's role to be honest.

Why did you decide to check Coco and not reckoner, whose role was more under suspicion of being an sk?

And could you post some flavor? DON'T quote.

Sorry, I was going to continue that post (that's why I had the quote), but thought I'd better just be safe.

Anyway, I dont understand why he'd check Reckoner. I actually think it makes more sense to check CoCo. D1, talk didnt come up about Reckoner's role being SK. It might have been briefly mentioned, but it wasnt a focus of any argument. So at this point, the tentative roles are.

Reckoner: Vig
CoCo: Cop
CB: Doctor
Quints: Lawyer

IF all of these are honest claims, then there is a 3/5 shot of hitting scum tonight for them, 3/4 for the two remaining town players in that group.

The problem is that none of these players have been acting very pro-town, and they all have a power role. I'm surprised that we came to L1 with each of these people and not one is scum, yet all have a power role. My initial reaction to Quints' claim was to obviously unvote to avoid a quick hammer just in case. But the thought that he and CoCo being scum partners also came through my mind. Could Quints have lied about checking CoCo to defend him? In which case, it could be that both are scum together. Or this could just be completely wrong and they are both town players. Like MME though, I would like a bit more from Quints. I need to think for a bit. I'll give more soon.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Could someone explain the Miller thing? I looked it up and still didnt quite understand it.

The flavor that quints gave is (as of now) the most believable to me. I do apologize sincerely for my gunning for you quints. I cant say i was in the wrong though.

I have one question though quints. You have files on every mafia member right? So is it safe to assume that you dont have any on the scum players? If so, how many files do you have? We can figure out how many we're up against.

One thing that bothers me though, is that you have files on Reckoner and CoCo (for which I'm reconsidering as town), but do you have a file for CB's doctor claim? I know you missed it before you told us about CoCo and Reckoner, but now that you know, is his role in your files?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Ok, so so far, this means that Quints (in my book) is a definite safe. Reckoner has a confirmed killing role making him either vig or SK, either of which should help the town find the scum. That leaves CB as Doctor and CoCo as cop. Either of which are semi-unconfirmed (the way I understand it). Just to be sure, quints, you can tell who's role is still in the game, but not if the role is scum/mafia, correct? I would not support either lynch tonight based on what we have going on at the moment. That leaves:

Starbuck
DRK
MME
Ryan

I put that list in order from least scummy to scummiest as far as I can tell. Ryan is my only semi-lynch candidate, but I cant say I have a strong scum-read on any of these players at the moment.

BTW quints, thanks for explaining the Miller thing.

[stuntkeyboardist]

NHT? Defense?

I didn't realize that there was something for me to defend. You voting habits post? I had clearly stated reasons every time I voted. But wasn't this argument used against lobster D1 as well? Didn't he die and flip town? Now you're re-using it against DRK and I? I really don't see what it is that you're trying to prove, especially when you take someone else's old, dis-proven argument, claim it as your own, then try to make yourself seem high and mighty with it.... or am I missing something?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Note that NHT takes as a fact that there are three scum. More importantly, he takes the statement as a given before any discussion of set-up speculation.

How about this: NOTE that I said multiple times throughout the game that we should be able to assume normal setup of 3 scum 9 town. You notice how I use parenthesis a lot? It was mainly here when I said (assuming 3 scum) or something of that sort.

[stuntkeyboardist]

NHT, I can't find a single time you made the disclaimer "(assuming 3 scum)" in a brief scan or anything close. The post I quoted clearly takes 3 scum as a given without any caveat.

Regardless, I know I've said something along those lines. But if that's the reason that you want me gone, then go ahead.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Let me just remark on your logic you two. First of all, standard set up is 3 v 9 in minis. 2 v 10 throws the odds way off, and 4 v 8 is game over from D1. You decide which configuration is logically going to happen.

Second: the NHT, DRK partnership used to be the NHT, DRK, Lobster partnership because we all had hig voting rates and never suspected one another. Lobster flipped town based on everybody else attacking him, then Reckoner's NK. The logic that was used to link us was disproven... how long ago? And now that it's come back up, it's a "solid observation."

Third: I've stated my reasoning behind the hammer.

Fourth: It's not my fault that people asct scummy, I vote them, then they claim so they wont get killed. It happens every game. So to call that a reason to vote me is a bit off.

Fifth: DRk has not been scummy in my eyes. Hence the reason I dont vote for him. Prove to me why I'm wrong here, then we'll talk.

Sixth: You're making yourself seem high and mighty, CB, because you were at the bottom, climbed your way to the top through an unconfirmed claim, and are now the one accusing because you know you wont get the votes today because of that possibility that you might be telling the truth.

Seventh: CB, if you're going to post any stats, you need to take into account the variables. How many people would wicked have voted had he survived D1? Would he have flipped town either way? yes. You also need to consider all of the others who died D1, all of whom had higher voting rates (4, 4, 5, with many new suspects today who they likely would have voted as well). So all of them with the high voting rates flip town, and you'll still use the arguments and even draw your own conclusions based on the faulty logic to vote me?

"conclusion: NHT and DRK's numbers are much higher then everyone else, except for wicked [

who was town

]."

Conclusion: bad argument

[stuntkeyboardist]

It's the whole "come form behind" thing CB. You were afraid to "play the game" before, but once you were sure no one would vote you because of your claim, you became high and mighty. CoCo did too. That's not doing your part to help the town. That's hiding for as much of the game as possible, then making everybody aware that they were wrong in voting you once you claimed. Right now, you arent afraid to do anything because you know that at this point in the game, people arent going to vote you (as I've said before).

And actually quints, 3 mafia and a serial killer is fairly common.

[stuntkeyboardist]

That is true quints, but in both games I've played on this site, I've been a very active player (if you include this one too, you'll understand). In my first game, I was the doctor, in the second, I was scum. I find that if you just plan well enough, it doesnt matter if you're incredibly active, you can still have your side win with your role alive or dead. My side has won in both games that I've played thanks to good planning.

So honestly, a good player doesnt need to stay out of the limelight. To me, it actually looks more like they have something to hide if they do stay in the shadows. Maybe that's why I dont suspect DRK and Starbuck as heavily as I have suspected every person who has claimed thus far...? Every person who has had to resort to claiming has played the 'in the shadows' game, and you know something's up with their play. Havent you seen this yet? I mean seriously, what was common among every person who has been forced to claim so far? See the connection?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Why did you say you'd "said multiple times throughout the game that we should be able to assume normal setup of 3 scum 9 town" when you didn't?

I honestly thought I did and still feel that I did, but I'm not going to re-read 50 pages to prove it. If I didnt then at least you know it ran through my mind and you can at least see how I came to that conclusion.

Also, Reckoner, is there any reason behind your vote? Because I'd really love to know. You never tend to give explanation to your votes (even when we ask (which is why you had to claim so early!!)), then you call me scummy. Because of that, I'd better not hear that you're voting for me because of the hammer.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Because I'm convinced that there's scum out of either you or DRK, and given an iso read on DRK, I'm not convinced he's scum, while the others' cases on you tend to sway me your way.

Can you give reasons of your own? Whose cases do you feel are strong? Why are you convinced that one of the two of us is scum? How about doing an iso read on myself before you vote me?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Quints, I went through and looked for a post where I talked about the options of the alignment. I could have sworn I mentioned it in the thread, but you're right, I guess I didnt. Sorry.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Mafia doctor is a fairly standard name (as compared with other names for the same role). It's not particularly hard to guess and you could have found it on mikeburnfire's site. Mafia Organ Collector would have been an awesome claim (someone should use that role in a game!), but a really stupid one because people would have difficulty believing you. The flavor seems legit, but it's not completely implausible you could have written it, especially with the examples for you to copy.

does any one else agree with Kitty on this. As in: Do any of you think that it is possible that i ditched my mods given safe claim, chose to be mafia doctor, and bs'd my flavor?

I certainly understand where he's coming from. Do I agree? I dont know. but I'm not about to say his argument is crap. I think it's much more logical than you think it is (or want to think it is).

Here's my idea about what the scum players get: I would say they get their normal "You are an anti-mafia agent infiltrating the organization... blah blah blah." But I also think they get an "You are disguising yourself as the Mafia _____ after you killed them. Their ability was ________." That way, they would always be able to make a legit post about it. Come to think of it, maybe their roles are similar to their posts. I mean (for example and for no other purposes) maybe Reckoner is an anti-mafia vig who has the ability to kill every night, but took the role of the actual vig. Do you see what I'm saying? But I'm still trying to put all the poeces together about quints' claim.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry that I havent claimed, but I cant. My advice to the town: do not leave me at L-1. I cant say much more, and I know it's tough, but you really need to trust me right now.

[stuntkeyboardist]

unvote

for now.

NHT, claim in your next post or I will re-vote you.

Sorry. Cant. I just need you to take my word.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually CB, it's funny that you mention the Godfather's daughter, because I am her father. My goal in the game was to protect her (hence why I didnt vote her/suspect her). I was able to deliver either a weapon or some kind of ammunition (the gun that she had) to anybody I chose during twilight. Obviously I chose her because it was the only role that I knew for certain. Had we both survived two twilights, she would have gotten both and been able to kill someone. Had I given CDB the gun, he would have been able to kill someone since he had the bullet (but I did not know this). Twilight lasted until I chose who got the weapon. And the best part is, since I'm the Godfather, I'm the only player who cannot be killed until there is a scum majority! The problem is that my role is deemed useless if I claim, or if you guys try to lynch me.

Thank guys! But now that we have 6!!!!! claims, let's make tonight worthwhile.

[stuntkeyboardist]

BTW, for quints' purposes, my title is "Mafia Godfather"

[stuntkeyboardist]

Just so you know, when I say

Stop Lynch

, I mean it...

[stuntkeyboardist]

I didnt forget my role, I was hoping the confidence would drive suspicion away. Which is something that I have been thinking about with CB's sudden extreme confidence.

So now for my comments on the day. First off, wtf Starbuck? You/DRK were two of the last people I would think to hammer. Especially when I thought people would actually start to listen to me. This makes me really need to rethink. And I was actually wrong, we have 5 claims, meaning 3/4 remaining people are scum (if everybody's claim was true). We also have 4 power roles and only one roleblocker, so we can get A LOT done tonight with that said. CoCo, I was never trying to be a jackass to you about the "Be smart tonight" comment. i was actually being honest. I also did not roleblock you, which is why I felt you were being suspicious earlier today when you accused me of all that junk.

quints, part of me being an active player this time around was knowing that I cant die unless there is a scum majority, but to be honest, I have a pretty agressive playstyle (which I seriously hope you guys can see now) and no matter my role, I always tend to post/vote a lot. it's just how I play.

Now, I'm going to bed. If the mod hasnt ended the day before I wake up tomorrow, I'll answer any other questions when I wake up. Otherwise, I'll see you guys on D3.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Just a real quick addition/correction to that last post, by 3 scum, i mean "assuming a normal game" and by 4 PR's I'm considering mine useless because I now have no power.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Oh, and the hammering pre-claim thing, I was actually SURE he was scum. Sorry that I was wrong. I'm also sorry about these short blurb posts. I'm really tired (it's past midnight here).

[stuntkeyboardist]

so if i understand this...NHT can prevent lynches?

No, I cannot prevent lynches. Only

I

cannot be killed. If someone else were to have been lynched today, I could do nothing about it (except vote... I guess). Here's a breakdown of my role:

1) I knew lobster alignment as my daughter.
2) I could give away a weapon or ammunition each twilight
3) Twilight ended when I submitted my order
4) If my role were to be revealed by any means, my ability to deal weapons becomes moot
5) Since I am the Godfather I cannot be killed by any means unless a majority of scum were reached and I were overpowered.

Do you see why I did not want to claim or have you guys try to lynch me? Honestly, I am a very honest player (unless of course, I'm scum). When I warned you guys to stop the lynch on me and to trust me, I was really hoping you would. And for a while, I thought you would for sure.

At the same time, I was hoping for a different lynch candidate, so the scum would try to NK me. D1 I did the same. I was hoping to have scum try to NK me by standing out as a powerful player. That way, they would have not killed anybody that night. I guess they felt CDB was more of a threat though.

And no, I cant sleep (which sucks).

[stuntkeyboardist]

Nice Reckoner!

[stuntkeyboardist]

Okay, so now this leaves us with 7 people. I'm still assuming that there are 2 scum left, so 2/7 scum. Of those who are left, we possibly have 4 claimed. If that's true, we have a 2/3 chance of lynching scum tonight.

But, if we lynch wrong and Reckoner misses as well, we drop from 2/7 to 2/4 and lose. So we are in the same boat as yesterday.

To answer CB's question from twilight:no. I remain unkillable. Essentially, when you guys discovered my identity, you took my remaining weapons because I was holding out. That's why I lost that ability. But I still remain unkillable until majority.

I have an idea rolling around in my head, but I'd like to hear night actions and such before we discuss this idea. And once again, good job Reckoner!

[stuntkeyboardist]

I suggest everyone rereads wolf/ryan's posts as we wait for the night results. It is always a good and useful idea to go reread confirmed scum's posts to look for connections.

Just finished doing that. It was funny because it was only a page and a half total compared to everybody else's 6-8 pages. Anyway, one thing I noticed about Wolfram was that every person he accused has flipped town (because every person he accused is dead). The only person who isnt dead that he accused is DRK. If the pattern follows, that would say that DRK is town, but leaves everybody else open to the possibility of scum.

Ryan, on the other hand, was much more eloquent with his words. He seemed to accuse/agree with everybody just the same, which makes it a bit less obvious where he was actually siding.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Yeah MME, I was getting CoCo mixed with CB when I did the read. That's why I thought that everybody but DRK was dead. But in that case, the DRK safe argument doesnt hold as much water. At the same time, I could see that either (a) DRK and CB are both innocent, (b) DRK and CB are both scum. I dont think wolfram was experienced enough to go after his own partners, so I'm leaning toward the former. On the other hand, Ryan seemed experienced enough to accuse just the same, which makes me lean toward the latter.

Since i've always felt that DRK had a strong town vibe, I'm going to sit with the former for now, but I do feel that the two are linked primerily based on wolfram's created relation to them.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Now, I need to re-read and see who was vehemently against CoCo.

**raises hand**

[stuntkeyboardist]

Mod, this is a bit nitpicky, but on pg 1 it says "Phase: Day 1." I think it could use some updating.

[stuntkeyboardist]

For me, at least, today's lynch is pretty easy because 2 of starbuck, mmk and drk are scum. Time to re-read.

Not necessarily. We have:

NHT - Mafia Godfather - confirmed
Reckoner - vig or SK - confirmed
quints - lawyer
Starbuck
DRK
CB - doctor
MME

So we have 2/5 shot (unconfirmed). There is no way that we can confirm you, and we also cannot confirm a doctor. Here is what needs to happen. Basically at this point, we need the real doctor to step forward. If no one does, I can start to believe CB's role. Real doc, if you're afraid to, think of it this way. There will be two doctors out. One is fake. If we dont lynch the real one, Reckoner can kill the other tonight. That puts us at 1/4 tomorrow guaranteed. And also remember that you win if your side wins. It's not on an individual basis.

However, quints, you will remain unconfirmed to us.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I've been considering a mass claim. That was what I was talking about before.We have three unknown roles. It seems to me that if we know the other three, we can at least know if they are all on quints' list. The other reason, is that if any of the claimed faked a claim before, we wouldnt just be overlooking them to look at the unclaimed.

Without saying anything more (until after), we can figure out a few things by a mass claim, but to say those things now might make a scum claim different. At the risk of this being our last day, I think this needs to happen. Anybody else agree? disagree?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Guys, the SK doesnt matter. We need to worry about lynching the scum first. If we kill all three scum and the game goes on, I think we know who is left to kill. Besides, if there's a scum majority, Reckoner would lose too. In his best interest, he needs to kill the last of the scum before he kills the last of the town.

[stuntkeyboardist]

plus i mean, assuming that qwints and i's claims are true.... Theres 2/3 scum out of the remaining people. we lynch town, and Reckoner has 100% chance of killing of killing scum tonight.

Only if everybody's claim thus far is true. But essentially, yes.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually DRK, part of the reason that I want a mass claim is that I think everybody has a power role; even the scum. I want to know everybody's night actions, and see how they fit in with the big picture. It would also confirm (via quints) that we have a few liars out there. Plus, if everybody has a PR (including the scum), then no, it isnt unbalanced. And if we can catch some contradicting evidence, between our unclaimed and claimed players, I think that would give us the edge over the scum getting the edge.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually, you're wrong in one case DRK. I know why xRx has an extra bullet.

Do you give away bullets?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Actually, you're wrong in one case DRK. I know why xRx has an extra bullet.

Do you give away bullets?

Yes I do.

So I would say it was safe to assume that we were to work together. Mind if I ask your role name?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Quints, I think I know a way around this issue...

Let me give a few more details about my role. First of all, I never got to chose what I gave away. At the beginning of D1, I was given the gun to give away based on D1 actions. I then got another gun at the beginning of D2. I assumed it was because of lobster dying and that gun being gone, but now I'm thinking it was because I will ONLY get guns and Starbuck will only give bullets. In other words, our two roles were meant to play together. When you guys tried to lynch me, I lost my ability to give anything, but I was never told I lost the gun that I was holding since the beginning of D2. That said, if we keep Starbuck until tomorrow, Starbuck gives me a bullet and CB protects Starbuck, we have another means of killing tomorrow. This would mean, qwints, in you situation, we go into D4 with that setup (with a few minor changes), we can lynch MME (or whoever) as scum, and I can kill Reckoner (sorry) during twilight. This would leave a mafia (town) majority, and we win. But we do need a mass claim.

[stuntkeyboardist]

At the same time though, that would be assuming I could use the gun. I dont see why I couldnt if it were in my possession.

[stuntkeyboardist]

quints?

[stuntkeyboardist]

Unsurprisingly, that's on my list. Furthermore, reckoner's receipt of starbuck's bullet confirms her ability. That certainly seems like a weird ability for scum. Why didn't you give a bullet on N1, starbuck?

I think C_o was here N1 and gave the bullet to CDB. Or Starbuck replaced in and gave the bullet to CDB. Somehow, CDB had one.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Hey Starbuck, why did you give Reckoner the bullet?

[stuntkeyboardist]

If we treat NHT, CB and myself as confirmed, I think we have an optimal strategy.

Today - Lynch Reckoner.
Tonight - CB protects me. I investigate 1 of DRK, Starbuck and MMK.
If I find town, we lynch DRK and then MMK. If I find scum, we lynch him leaving LYLO with NHT against the 2 possible remaining targets.

This plan has a 2/3 chance of success with myself and NHT making random choices, better if we're better than chance at scum hunting. Unless, of course, scum have another PR up their sleeve.

I'm certainly open to other possibilities, but I don't like the fact that we seem to have an alternative way to create a vig.

I'll re-read ryan to see if I can find any clues, but that's my proposal if y'all think I'm more likely to be mafia than reckoner is.

This is a good idea, but that's only if you're town. And no offense, but I'm just not ready to hand over the fate of the game to someone who's still unconfirmed.

Any you're right about that quote. It is interesting.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I do think I made a mistake because it seems that Reckoner does not need any bullets from me if he didn't even use it.

It's not necessarily a mistake. had you given it to scum, they may have had a gun and been able to kill a townie. You gave it to someone who didnt need/couldnt use it. By that, there was no way a scum player could better their odds.

[stuntkeyboardist]

If we treat reckoner, NHT and CB as confirmed- we've got a forced win.
If CB and I are scum, lynching/vigging 2 of MMK, DRK Starbuck is a mafia loss.
If NHT is scum, we're fucked.
If reckoner is sk, we have to lynch him or face a 2-1-1 day 4.
If there is only 1 scum remaining, we're golden.

Most importantly, if CB and I are scum lynching reckoner may force a town win.

1) I would just say Reckoner isnt scum. but I wouldnt confirm him. I would confirm Starbuck though. I doubt the mod would give her a role that allows her to give out bullets to allow someone to possibly kill her. Bulletsmith seems legit.
2) -
3) Would you seriously think the mod would give a scum a role where they couldnt be killed?
4) Or we have my plan
5) Doubtful

[stuntkeyboardist]

I already asked the mod. Just waiting on a response. If I can, it would completely change our options. So here is what we have so far:

NHT - Mafia Godfather - confirmed
Reckoner - Sk/Vig - confirmed
Starbuck - Mafia Bulletsmith - confirmed
quints - Mafia Lawyer -
CB - Mafia Doctor -
DRK - -
MME - -

So basically, if we hit one tonight, we can definitely have a town or SK win nmw. We need the other two claims for further info. They will either be two power roles, or two scum. For everybody but two people to have power roles seems a bit off.

I wrote this about 15 minutes ago, but had to do something before I finished, but I lost my train of thought... sorry.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry for the spam, but I just realized something: 2 separate kills tonight are somewhat unlikely. If we've id'd the scum then the scum + reckoner only have 3 targets for their kills that don't lead to a mafia win.[vig-reckoner means an insta-win in this case.] Given CB's protection, there's a significant chance that we'll be at 3-1-1 tomorrow which will be a mafia win. In fact, based on a quick calculation, I think there's a 1/3 chance (at best) of two separate kills going through.

Can you break this down a bit? It sounds like you definitely have something here, but I'm having a difficult time understanding everything.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Okay, that makes much more sense, but again, that's assuming that you and CB are NOT scum. You may know the answer to this, but no one else can which is the real kicker. But if you are town, then you're completely right.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Sorry DRK

vote: DRK

.

It seems convenient that you checked me night 1 and ryan night 2. Especially since you know that ryan definitely had a gun and that I didnt.

What I think is funnier, is that I actually had a gun the whole time. While I was able to deal them, I took one for myself. I've been playing stupid the entire day today acting like i didnt know whether or not I could use my gun, even though i knew I could use the one that I didnt tell you guys about.

In other words, I've had two guns during the day, and only one at night. Sorry bud.

[stuntkeyboardist]

under the general idea that there are 2 more scum... i ask to starbuck and nht: who is lying?

I would easily say DRK.

[stuntkeyboardist]

If it's true that I show innocent to investigation, then this role is truly godly.

[stuntkeyboardist]

A common addition to the Mafia family. The Godfather heads the family, and is in charge of sending night kill choices to the Game Moderator.

Also, the Godfather usually appears innocent to Cops.

In games with multiple families or other roles that can kill at night (such as the Vigilante), the Godfather may also be immune to being killed at night.

I guess that does sort of explain it. I'll

unvote

for now.

Just so you guys know, when I play mafia (live) we dont play with power roles. So (as you can see) I'm not exactly up on all of this. I've never heard of a lot of these roles, and I dont know the extent that all of them have.

[stuntkeyboardist]

most of these arent usually used in traditional mafia.

Cop, doctor, and vig at most.

miller and bomb...not so much...

these gun ones or lawyer...i've never heard of.

Yeah, I think there was a cop and doctor in every game I've played. The others... not so much. I've also never received a role PM that was 22 lines long before either, so that was a bit of a surprise. Plus, that's 22 lines on a 25.5 inch monitor.

[stuntkeyboardist]

I think DRK's claim is bullshit, tbqh. And did I miss the MME claim?

Yeah, his is the one where if one of us hammers him, they die as well.

quints, can you dispove DRK's claim?

[stuntkeyboardist]

It's on the list.

Now quints, you sadi you had a list with 16 names on it right? I'd like every name on that list please. There is no reason to hold back now. Everybody is out in the open and I want to know them all.

DRK, I wasnt asking him about your role to confirm you, I have something else in mind. I have a few more pieces of information that I need first though.

[stuntkeyboardist]

And just so everybody knows, I got my response on the gun. Yes i can use it. Even though we all knew that answer anyway.

[stuntkeyboardist]

Okay, so here's my opinion on everything that's going on at the moment.

Let me start by saying, I think Reckoner is a vig. It wouldnt match the flavor to have anybody else but the two sides here, and the flavor seems to have been done with a lot of care. To break that just to put an SK role in wouldnt make sense to me.

Secondly, I do believe you quints. Not only have you recently been playing a (seemingly) town game, but I can see your connection to CB. You said that you feel the scum imitate the role that they killed. I feel the same way.

In this opinion^^, I dont see why there would be a scum doctor (CB, this is saying that I'm starting to believe you as well). To imitate a real doctor and have their powers as scum just doesnt sit well with me.

Starbuck, I dont feel that you're scum because you wouldnt be giving people ammo knowing that they could become vigs and possibly eliminate the scum.

On the other hand, I can see the value in DRK's role to the scum. If they can find who has a gun, they can kill them before the gun-barer kills him. I think DRK is scum. Strongly. You played a great game this whole time, but I think I'm definitely right on this one.

Vote: DRK

Now for MME. Sorry bud, but you're the last one standing. I've never played with your role before (though it seems others have), so I might be wrong here. I think it's possible that you arent a bomb at all, but are using the excuse that you are so that we wont kill you. Maybe excuse isnt the right word. Maybe that's what your role actually did entail, but to me, an assassin does not kill whoever tries to kill them. So I think you could be making up the bomb part.

Here's how I think today and tomorrow should go if I'm right. This is taking all possible scenarios into account:

1)First we kill DRK tonight.
2)CB protects Starbuck, Starbuck gives me a bullet. I cant die, and Starbuck cant die, so that would mean that either Reckoner, CB, or quints would die by scum.
(a)If online is the same play as real life, town gets first say though. 3)So Reckoner, if he were to die, he could kill MME first.
(a)If MME is a bomb, Reckoner would die anyway.
(b)If he isnt, we could possibly have won the game right here regardless of who Reckoner targets because he wouldnt be able to kill (Reckoner gets first say).

Tomorrow that could leave:

me
Starbuck
Reckoner
CB
quints

1a) If Reckoner does die by the bomb, we've eliminated our chance of an SK, and town would win.
1b) If he isnt a bomb, then we could target Reckoner tomorrow if he's an SK.
2a)If I'm wrong about MME and DRK, we lose (if MME is a bomb).
2b)If I'm right about one of them, the odds are definitely on our side tomorrow.
3)If we lynch scum, I can kill Reckoner during twilight, and town wins.

I think this will work, but I need feedback. Anyone agree? Disagree?

[stuntkeyboardist]

DRK, can I ask the value of your role to the town?

[stuntkeyboardist]

That plan confused me, so...

What if you're all wrong (like you are) and I'm a vig and not SK?

I explained that you are probably a vig. I'll retype the plan more clearly in a bit (when i have time)