Mini 873 Plainview Game Over

Sanjay · Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:40 pm

Oh, remember that "There is no way foilist13 would mix-up his scumbuddy's name with someone else's name" thing?

Unvote

Sanjay · Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:51 pm

Way less likely.

Sanjay · Fri Dec 18, 2009 1:02 pm

Also, if the final scum is cruelty, foilist13 is a pretty damn good scumhunter.

Sanjay · Fri Dec 18, 2009 1:27 pm

Oh my. Read through page 7.

1. cruelty floats the idea that foilist13 is not necessarily scummy and might just be irritatingly stubborn.
2. MordyS says he is sort of getting a poor-town vibe from MordyS.
3. Benmage posts a vote count, clearly showing three votes on foilist13, from archaebob, SpyreX and MordyS.
4. foilist13 posts a full player analysis with scummy vibes on exactly three people: Muffin, Gammagooey and cruelty.
5. cruelty says foilist13 is his top suspect. But more importantly: cruelty accuses foilist13 of "basically getting scummy vibes from anyone who dares question him". WHAT?

I mean look at this post.

cruelty, explain this.

Sanjay · Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:04 pm

cruelty wrote:I also think foilist is running a huge OMGUS game here. He's basically getting scummy vibes from anyone who dares question him, this isn't really a tell as such, just a general observation that his opinion of who and who isn't scum seems to be relatively worthless at this point.

Look at this friggin' quote, cruelty.

You are ever so subtly defending three people and only three people here. Two of them are mafia. One of them is you.

You need to do much better than "I don't recall".

Sanjay · Fri Dec 18, 2009 5:34 pm

Yes, lots of people inadvertently defend scum in the process of normal scumhunting. Associative scumtells are terrible.

But here's the thing:

I have no idea what you are talking about in that quote

. You were accusing foilist13 of something that was totally bananas and you can't explain what the heck you were thinking. The accusation that foilist13 was getting scummy vibes from the people who were questioning him is patently false.

So I have to conclude either:

A) As town, you said something completely balls to the wall contrary to what was happening in the thread for no good reason.
B) You had a good reason.

And you know what? It is damning and I am going to vote for you.

Vote: cruelty

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:24 am

cruelty wrote:The thing is, I never really got massively scummy vibes from either of the two flipped scum. In fact, I said something along those lines right around that time -
cruelty wrote:I don't entirely agree with your epic wall post (I think Muffin tends to waffle (get it?) on a bit but I wouldn't say he's entirely devoid of content)

Out of my top 3 suspects (overall, for the entire game), 2 have flipped town, one (foilist) is still alive. I've just been completely wrong this entire game. I thought (think) foilist was (is) scummy, I didn't have an issue with Muffin (or GG) so why wouldn't I say that? It's not a case of me trying to defend my scumbuddies, it's just me being wrong. I'd love to be infallible, unfortunately it's not the case.

Basically, I'm going to dismiss your case as a misinterpretation of my bad reads. Do what you will.

Give me a break.

Read my posts.

This isn't an issue of you being infallible.

This isn't an issue of you thinking the wrong people were scum.

This is an issue of you saying something that is obviously false and you having no explanation for why you said it or how you might have made that mistake.

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:53 am

Also, friends, there is something else very interesting to show you:

Here gammagooey, our favorite scumster, gave up his position on the four vote cruelty wagon to jump on to the four vote peanutman wagon (here's the vote count if you don't believe me for some reason).

That in itself doesn't make cruelty more scummy. Gammagooey could have simply decided that the peanutman lynch had more support or something and figured moving to lynch peanutman would make less splashes. But what does make cruelty more scummy is what happened next.

Earlier, Gammagooey had made it clear that he would be down for the lynch of three dudes: AlmasterGM, peanutman, and cruelty.

So peanutman cop claims with an innocent on AlmasterGM. But here's the thing: Gammagooey drops the case on cruelty. Despite joining the peanutman lynch "because of the deadline". Read from the peanutman claim to the archaebob lynch. Gammagooey is no interested in archaebob.

There are three explanations for this:

1. Gammagooey was trying to frame town-cruelty: This seems kind of silly. Why frame someone you could get a mislynch on?
2. Gammagooey forgot he was down with a town-cruelty lynch: A little more plausible, but it still seems unlikely. Why would scum forget who they were trying to mislynch? Why would scum abandon a perfectly good wagon they could totally defensibly be on?
3. Gammagooey was protecting scum-cruelty. Gammagooey thought three lynch choices were enough for him to distance his scumpartner and still hop onto something else more appealing when the time was right. But peanutman claiming cop with an innocent on AlmasterGM threw that all to hell.

I think this is what happened

.

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 8:53 am

cruelty, a question:

In this post you say you felt like AlmasterGM's case on Gammagooey about his avatar was a "point of massive misrepresentation".

Could you explain what you were thinking behind that?

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:24 am

foilist13, aren't you worried that you are just suspicious of cruelty because he dared to question you?

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:27 am

I know, cruelty.

I know.

But isn't it interesting that you seemed to recall that perfectly and yet you can't seem to recall what was happening on page 7?

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:06 pm

Huh.

I guess I define interesting as "scummy". Not what you'd find in the OED, I know. I'm kind of a descriptivist like that.

Anyway, you have at least demonstrated that you can venture a guess as to your specific thought processes regarding things before page 7, so why not try your hand at page 7? I know it is a bit more complicated, but I believe in you.

And if you could be so kind, I have an additional request:

Could you explain your thinking behind Post 918?

I'm interested in why you brought up that quote of me.

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 3:29 pm

If you're town I'm going to be disappointed in

you

.

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 6:50 pm

Cut the sob story.

If you don't want to defend yourself against anything, drop the foilist13 vote and vote for who you really want lynched today.

Vote cruelty.

If you change your mind and DON'T want to be lynched, stop ignoring half my posts and start addressing them. It shouldn't be too hard to do. All the arguments against you are ludicrous, so it should be a walk in the park pointing out what is wrong with them. Do it.

And if you are really so concerned about the secret scum that is hiding somewhere besides your playerslot, why don't you do some scumhunting? It's a big thread. Find something.

YOU HAVE 1 VOTE ON YOU.

The fact that you are giving up now is absolutely ridiculous. I truly hope you are scum, cruelty. If you are, your play was really very good this game. If not, this is pathetic.

Sanjay · Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:04 pm

If you are town and the entire town is set against you, you are in the best position to figure out who the real scum is.

You are the hero that this town needs.

You are what the criminals fear most.

You are the shadow that won't rest.

You are The Batman.

Come on. It's a long time since PhaerieM or Papa Zito donned the cowl. If you want to play town, suit up.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:33 am

I think we should lynch who we think is scum today and if we happen to be wrong we NL tomorrow without expanding on who we think is the final scum given the town flip.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:54 am

cruelty wrote:I think that Sanjay is exaggerating bad points against me. I guess they're legitimate, but the fact is you're not bringing up anything from the last 50 pages. You're going to try to condemn me for some things I said way back in early game when nobody had a clue about anything? I should note that bad doesn't necessarily mean illegitimate, I just mean that the case is fairly fragile and depends a lot on other (dead) people's testimonies, specifically peanut (who also presented a poor case).

My case doesn't depend on peanutman at all. It just depends on you, and you explaining how when it was archaebob, MordyS and SpyreX mainly questioning foilist13 and foilist13 getting scummy vibes from Gammagooey, Muffin and you, you said that foilist13 was just getting scummy vibes from people who dared to question him and they could be disregarded.

I can explain what happened with you as scum. You can't explain what happened with you as town.

I know you can't really defend against post 1500. We can't question Gammagooey right now and we wouldn't be able to trust him. Still, this inconsistency in his behavior is quite weird and implicates you in a way that I don't think is deliberate.

Also, you missed this:

Sanjay wrote:Could you explain your thinking behind Post 918?

I'm interested in why you brought up that quote of me.

And you know what? If you want me to bring up something more recent, I can totally do that.

Why did you get freaked out and claim from a few people sort of saying "yeah, cruelty is probably the scum"? Why have you been so evasive? This is not the first time I clarified my case against you, and you are still acting like I am voting you because something you said could be seen as defending scum. Why are you acting like the only thing important is that you don't get lynched? You aren't scumhunting. You aren't questioning anyone's motives. You are just making statements like "Hey look, town, aren't these other suspects much more interesting? You should look into that."

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 7:59 am

cruelty, if I look through the thread and compare how much pressure you've been under vs. how much scumhunting you've done, what kind of relationship do you think I would see?

It seems like you are postulating that these two variables are related. Am I wrong?

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 2:38 pm

As

inexcusable

as hammering archaebob might have been, I did it too, more or less. My vote was effectively a hammervote.

You are going to have to excuse at least one of us.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:27 pm

Putting him at L-1 with the clear expectation that MordyS would hammer.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:29 pm

Surely your case on MordyS isn't so good you are going to start helping cruelty defend himself, foilist13.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:55 pm

I do want to hear more from Papa Zeets and PhaerieM.

If it aint cruelty, I just have no idea right now.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:10 pm

foilist13 wrote:@Mordy - You are implying that Cruelty meant letting you as town bury yourself, which is obviously a stupid thing for him to say, and I know he is intelligent enough not to have meant that.

FOILIST13 ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

If you want to pick up the banner archaebob dropped, maybe you should actually read his posts:

archaebob wrote:And please stop defending me. Every argument you use in my defense is one that I can no longer use myself, as my attackers will just interpret it as me nodding in agreement with other people who step in for me. The town needs to see that my views are consistent, and they need to see the explanations come from me, without help from others.

Stop defending cruelty.

STOP.

Sanjay · Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:27 pm

I was starting to get a real good feel for a foilist13-archaebob scumteam especially after MordyS posted that inconsistency and archaebob was stalling answering it. I was more than happy to rush things along.

I didn't doubt he was legitimately busy, but his reasons for stalling (that he needed to write a big wall post) seemed off. He didn't need a big wall post. He just needed to explain that thing.

Also, even if archaebob was town, I really didn't see what use we'd have for a gigantic wall of words explaining exactly why it was that I was scum.

Sanjay · Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:04 am

You know, just the usual stuff.

What you think about things.

How you are doing.

A confession if you are scum.

That sort of thing.

Sanjay · Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:08 pm

What?

Sanjay · Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:25 am

Take your time, we've got plenty of it.

But the reason you need to do the questioning is because you called for it. You can't just say "okay, I'm gonna question this guy" and do it. You have to have questions. I don't have any for MordyS right now.

foilist13: Could you compare your MordyS case and your cruelty case for me? From what you've said about both of them it seems like there is much more stuff you find compelling about cruelty than you find about MordyS. Why do you think the MordyS case is more compelling in general?

Sanjay · Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:31 am

foilist13, you can basically just answer MordyS's question and ignore mine because it is more or less mine but with better imagery.

Sanjay · Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:41 am

Okay foilist13 that didn't really answer my question then.

Why was MordyS your number one suspect when it seemed like your cruelty case was much better?

Sanjay · Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:33 am

I'm mostly waiting for more from foilist13 and cruelty right now. You don't have to prod me.

Sanjay · Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:52 am

Happy birthday, BTW.

Sanjay · Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:44 pm

Unvote

Like hell you are self-hammering.

Sanjay · Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:57 pm

Is cruelty your number one suspect, foilist?

Sanjay · Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:45 pm

cruelty wrote:The thing is, I never really got massively scummy vibes from either of the two flipped scum. In fact, I said something along those lines right around that time -
cruelty wrote:I don't entirely agree with your epic wall post (I think Muffin tends to waffle (get it?) on a bit but I wouldn't say he's entirely devoid of content)

Out of my top 3 suspects (overall, for the entire game), 2 have flipped town, one (foilist) is still alive. I've just been completely wrong this entire game. I thought (think) foilist was (is) scummy, I didn't have an issue with Muffin (or GG) so why wouldn't I say that? It's not a case of me trying to defend my scumbuddies, it's just me being wrong. I'd love to be infallible, unfortunately it's not the case.

Basically, I'm going to dismiss your case as a misinterpretation of my bad reads. Do what you will.

cruelty, do you understand why I am dissatisfied with this response?

Sanjay · Tue Dec 29, 2009 5:44 pm

That's stupid.

Sanjay · Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:19 pm

cruelty, I already did ask you loads of questions. Do you want me to ask them again or what?

foilist, is cruelty your number one suspect right now?

Sanjay · Wed Dec 30, 2009 12:56 pm

cruelty, how are all these melodramatics coming from the same person who didn't understand why I said I would be disappointed in you if you turned up town?

I've asked you plenty and typed plenty for you to respond to besides the page 7 stuff.

What is this, chopped liver?

Read the thread.

Sanjay · Thu Jan 07, 2010 1:59 pm

Good game everybody!

This was a really fun town to play with.

Sanjay · Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:18 pm

Also, I am so so sorry, archaebob.

Sanjay · Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:38 pm

It's a real shame cruelty got lynched.

I had changed my opinion on him pretty solidly and would not have thrown that hammer.

His "oh woe is me" routine, while not very helpful, did not look very much like the final scum.

Sanjay · Thu Jan 07, 2010 5:48 pm

Well, good effort then, cruelty.

I don't think desire to lynch scum and not just the person who decided to stop answering questions is a scum tell, though. Note it.

Sanjay · Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:08 pm

Man, I'm sorry you felt that way. I kind of had a breakthrough midway through that day you got lynched where I realized you were probably town.

So I totally would have been your posse.

Sanjay · Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:14 pm

Papa Zito:

Very impressive stuff, but there is one thing that isn't quite clear to me.

Do you really like my comics or was that an impressive scum tactic?