Mini 1026 - Ohne Mafia (Game Over!)

[caelum]

confirm

[caelum]

Sorry about my inactivity, I'll be making a post later tonight.

[caelum]

Blah. The lot of you are pretty freakin' scummy but I'll focus on the people who I feel are the scummiest.

Moose:

Archaebob- You are 100% right in your argument. There was nothing you said I disagreed with in regards to boberz.

Why would you "100%" agree with Archaebob in his argument and then not back up your words with a vote?

Do you tend to flip flop alot? Are always looking to join a bandwagon?

I don't see the point to these questions. You admitted that you didn't read his explanation, and then since you didn't focus on his explanation I assume that you were satisfied by it as well. How does his behavior when it comes to BW's affect his alignment at all?

He 'flip-flopped' once and for good reason, looks like you're either subtly trying to make something innocuous seem scummy or defend your lack of attention to his previous post. Don't try to defend it by saying that you were looking for more information, because I fail to see how his BW patterns will affect your read on him.

So, I am totally lost now. Going to work, be back later guys

What call is there for confusion? I didn't see anything that confused me [excluding Bober's WIFOM defense], what confused you?

Moose's last 5 posts

You think I am awesome. You also think I am very cool.
I'd guess for realz you think very little of me.

What does "Most fallacious tell ever." mean? I feel dumb right now.

Want a claim = Tell me your role = Fishing of roles = Rolefishing

Yeah no political talk. Jesus isn't real. LOL

So it's all war, jesus and guns for you eh? Meh, no political talk. LOL.
So, I am totally lost now. Going to work, be back later guys

Can you explain the lack of real material in your posts over the last 3 or 4 pages?

Bober

Archae/Others have covered my main problems with you. However:

Have you heard of Andy Burnham?
Of course I have, I wouldnt have asked the question otherwise. A politician in Britain but I did not really expect anyone to know him
The reason for this question was firstly to prove my mate wrong, but secondly put people a bit at ease (a trick I learned when I first saw RQS, making them think the questions were a bit more icebreakery

Why would you want them to be more icebreakery? Icebreakery doesn't give us useful information, it gives us 3 pages of nonsense.

It pops out because you've been crusading RQS over RVS this game, RVS > Icebreaker questions. Agree/Deny?

Why would you want to put people at ease? Seems more of a scum tactic, to put people at ease rather then keeping them on guard and sharp at all times.

Furclow

Most stuff has been covered by others.

it wasn't serious.

If your FoS wasn't serious... why make a FoS in the first place. This makes me think that you're lying and that you had some basis for that FoS, which doesn't make sense because why didn't you just vote Bob instead of joke voting someone else?

I am content with boberz defense of himself. I'm not ready to write him off as confirmed, and I wasn't ever really suspicious of the RQS, I was suspicious of his lurking the forum and not posting until being called out on it.

I don't remember Bober ever addressing him lurking on the forum, so unless you can point that out, I want you to explain how you were satisfied with his defense.

[caelum]

Vote: Furcolow

I do think that you're a VI, but I'm not prepared to let you off the hook as some others have done simply because you play scummily.

my fos wasn't serious because it was page 1. Do you believe you can catch scum on page 1? Typically people who FoS and vote someone like I did will be aligned with the person they FoSed in the first place, correct? Isn't that a standard JEEP tell?

Your reasoning for your vote on Bober is the exact same as your reasoning for your FoS on Bober on D1. You were willing to bring Bober to L - 1 and have him claim on page 3 for a non serious reason. Earlier, you said that you were satisfied with Bober's defense and that the main reason why you had your vote on Bober was because of that same non serious reason. Please point out where in Bober's defense that he once mentioned why he was lurking on the forums. Actually, please tell me how lurking on the forums is a scumtell. I lurk if I just want to get a quick read and don't have time to post.

Caelum has done no scumhunting, but made a massive post pretending to, the nearest he got was lurker hunting moose, worth doing but no actual info has been found. Not very good, need more.

Funny. Your reasoning on Moose:

Moose, instigated political talk, and is very guilty in not letting it drop earlier. Very very lurky. Hung onto the coattails of abob's accusation of me. The flip flop that admittedly wasnt a flip flop was the only content he has posted, now this I feel has been undermined content is needed Now. Actually quite scummy for the lack of content but will to talk about rubbish vote moose

Ignoring the fact that your first sentence doesn't really make sense, sounds a lot like my 'lack of real scumhunting and real info':

Very very lurky. Actually quite scummy for the lack of content but will to talk about rubbish vote moose

Can you explain the lack of real material in your posts over the last 3 or 4 pages?

Hung onto the coattails of abob's accusation of me.

Why would you "100%" agree with Archaebob in his argument and then not back up your words with a vote?

The flip flop that admittedly wasnt a flip flop was the only content he has posted, now this I feel has been undermined content is needed Now

I don't see the point to these questions. You admitted that you didn't read his explanation, and then since you didn't focus on his explanation I assume that you were satisfied by it as well. How does his behavior when it comes to BW's affect his alignment at all?

He 'flip-flopped' once and for good reason, looks like you're either subtly trying to make something innocuous seem scummy or defend your lack of attention to his previous post. Don't try to defend it by saying that you were looking for more information, because I fail to see how his BW patterns will affect your read on him.

Let's not nitpick. The point is, it's strange that you call me out for pretending to scumhunt and not providing anything new when only

after

my post did you FoS moose at all, with reasoning on similar subjects.

K, I'll post a quick write up when I get off work.

Hope you'll answer my questions in Page 6 as well.

Sidenote: I'm confused over the Hresz/Wraith issue. It sounds like Hresz just voted Wraith for active lurking and then Wraith defended himself with outside reasons and then voted Hresz for voting Bober. Is that about right or can someone explain to me simply.

[caelum]

FEMM doesn't give a whole lot of material, but his pressing the so-called NB "flip-flop" issue is unsettling. I've already given my opinion on that.

I'm satisfied by Furcolow's explanation of his flip-flop on boberz (I only skimmed through that). On his supposed "rolefishing," IMO claiming is a good way to slip up scum (by getting a possible counterclaim against them) or to prevent a mislynch of a PR. So asking for a claim is a null-tell to me. However, his last vote on NB reeks of OMGUS. Even though he redacted it, it puts me in the mindset of just finding an excuse to put a vote down.

I'm satisfied with boberz's defenses and scumhunting. I don't suspect him at the moment.

NB's scumhunting is commendable, and he has certainly turned around the attitude toward him since page 2. Right now he and AB are my top two pro-town suspects, although I'n not really sure where NB gets his "FEMM needs to die" attitude from only 8 posts.

Alarm bells are going off in my head right now when I read Hresz's posts. His primary scumdar alerts early on were of "nervousness," when anything can be interpreted as "nervousness" (this paragraph can be interpreted as "nervousness" on my part by a scumbag). He suddenly put down a vote on me with absolutely no reasoning, then took AB's opinions against me as his own case against me when "active lurking," which I've just explained, is no basis alone for a lynch on somebody. Perhaps if that lurker has actively been anti-town in the posts he made, that could be a good basis. But I'm not making stupid votes or accusations. At the moment he is going after boberz while keeping his vote on me, and boberz is at the moment a solid player. I see no reason to suspect him at this time.

Vote: Hrescz

Wouldn't call that giving an opinion soley on you.

[caelum]

scum, scum, scum!!
UNVOTE: VOTE: caelum
if you think Furcolow is VI, you should not vote for him... I agree that Fur's play is either VI or scum... but if you think his play isn't scum but only VI, there is no reason to vote him

... So when a VI is scum ... and plays scummily ... then I should let him off the hook simply because he's a VI ... ?

[caelum]

EBWODP: I don't remember me saying that I think that Fur's play is EITHER VI OR scum nor do I remember me saying that I'm voting Furc because he's a VI.

Sidenote: A2 needs to be replaced.

[caelum]

Tasky

I do think that you're a VI, but I'm not prepared to let you off the hook as some others have done simply because you play scummily.

Translation: I think that you play scummily as town. But I'm not going to clear just because you play scummily.

Bober

Yes, I am.

Moose

If you're not "feeling" it, can you request a replacement before this game's length repels replacements?
Same thing to A2.

[caelum]

Moose

The last bit with Bober seems like a slip to me, but I have difficult catching context clues from Bober by the way he butchers the English language so, I'd like to hear what his apparent meaning was.

I also do think that a Bober/Furcolow scumteam is likely.

[caelum]

Fur are you intentionally ignoring the second question I asked you on page 6 and have reminded you twice now(?) to answer?

I am content with boberz defense of himself. I'm not ready to write him off as confirmed, and I wasn't ever really suspicious of the RQS, I was suspicious of his lurking the forum and not posting until being called out on it.

I don't remember Bober ever addressing him lurking on the forum, so unless you can point that out, I want you to explain how you were satisfied with his defense.

Also:

I wasn't worried about boberz claim whatsoever. I was ready for him to be lynched because of lurking and

Archaebob's post.

I am content with boberz defense of himself. I'm not ready to write him off as confirmed, and I wasn't ever really suspicious of the RQS,

I was suspicious of his lurking the forum and not posting until being called out on it.

I love when people try to make their reasoning sound better by lying about it

[caelum]

A lot of people are getting away with not answering questions and not really posting very much content

Like Fur. I'm content with my vote, unless he gives a super amazing answer. I'd also like to see Femm's response to NB's case on him as well as more content from [REDACTED] before I consider switching.

[caelum]

foilist/moose what do you think of Fur voting bober for fail reasoning and then unvoting when bober gave a defense that never addressed his fail reasoning?

[caelum]

I don't really like that post. You fos him for active lurking but you don't fos femm, who NB made clear has active lurked and you aren't calling him scum or town... so is he 3rd party?

[caelum]

The wagon on Wraith is dumb, he's had IRL issues and has admitted he has posted on skims/not a lot of time. Moose/Tasky needs a wagon.

Zhero, can you replace:
a2
Femm
Tasky

[caelum]

EBWODP:

unvote

vote: Moose

[caelum]

No one is taking you 'exposing me as scum' seriously because your reasoning is misunderstood/flawed.

If you're finding it difficult enough to not reread 13 pages of text then replace out, no one's going to give you a summary and hold your hand throughout the game.

If you want their real opinion freakin' read what they're saying (admittedly, rereading some of Bober's posts are confusing as they're in 'note form').

Frankly, I could care less about what you think of me because you haven't shown much activity and your reasoning on me as scum + you're serious about it makes me think your play is vaguely VI.

[caelum]

Blah. If it'll get this game moving + cement how I feel about Wraith

unvote
vote:Wraith

[caelum]

... You just hammered him

[caelum]

EBWODP: Nvm, thought you voted Wraith

[caelum]

I don't really like any of those reasons because it's like you're telling us we should keep you around simply because your posts have been getting better, you're not dangerous, and you want to win - all of which scum can do/can be/can want. Your ISO on Furc/Bober was decent, but scumtelling on them is easy because Furc is a VI and Archae made a case on Bober before, and your ISO on Wraith seems forced as you call him out for active lurking but you seem unwilling to call him scum - at the same time you're willing to vote for him. I'd say if you're town, you need to either start "feeling" this game or replace out because your slot is high up there on my, and apparently 3 or 4 others, scumlist and I don't see you moving down from there any time soon.

[caelum]

EBWODP: Thanks Femm.

[caelum]

So you don't like Archae controlling town but you hop on the wagon regardless?

You never gave that promised reasoning on Moose and his defense is scummy but you still unvoted.

From that last post, I see a bunch of giving up based off of 'spam' reasons, you complaining that you don't like Mayor Archae, but then voting Wraith anyways with a "Welp." [In addition to some questions towards Moose and some statements towards Femm.]

[caelum]

I'd prefer that.

unvote
vote: Moose

[caelum]

My gut reaction is that I don't believe the claim. Please make your argument that you mentioned in #358.

[caelum]

Sigh. After looking at Moose's EM record as well as him explaining the whole not feeling it business, I believe him too. I think it would be worth waiting for a couple of reports [assuming we have a protective role] rather than lynch him right now. Moose, since you have now been outed [assuming you're town] and can start "feeling it" I'm expecting that your play will improve considerably.

We don't have a lot of choice here. We have 4 people who need to be replaced, and a VI. I think putting pressure on Bober/Hresz would do us some good, NB - no one is going to bother putting pressure on someone who has requested replacement and has stated V/LA issues in regards to his lurking until his replacement comes in and show us some content.

unvote
vote: Bober

[caelum]

Zhero, this might be my second or third time asking but:

Those who haven't shown considerable activity as to so far are ruining this game. A2 should've been replaced 7 or 8 pages ago, and Tasky has made less than a dozen posts over 16 pages. Please at the very least replace those two in addition to Femm.

Tasky Iso

Post 16: Only thing that caught my attention was

What is everyone's opinions on lurkers?
-> I really dislike them

Lol.

Post 28: Seems to indicate VI, missed Moose's post.
Post 102: Unvotes Bob for reasoning that is irrelevant to his original reasoning. His unvoting reasoning is dumb, clears Bob for asking scummy questions.
Post 105: Seems worried about what Furcolow thinks of him.
Post 128: Some nonsense about strange scumhunting techniques, promises a read on everyone after everyone tells him what they think of him.
Post 205: Votes me off of what

think

is a misunderstanding
Post 214: Defends poor vote/reasoning
Post 313: Still defends poor vote/reasoning on me. Admits he doesn't have enough time to fully engage in game but still wants to stick around. Asks for a summary of the game, doesn't seem to want to read the thread, asks everyone the same question as in post 128.


Eh. I could see him as scum. I'm just wary that he's a VI. Other than the active lurking and fail votes as up to so far, the thing that pops out is he seemed worried as to how Furcolow thought of him in post 105. That and he is rather intent on find out what we think of him. I'd like to wait for his replacement to provide more content as opposed to voting him right now.


Sidenote: Actually, I'd like to see the answer to Bober's question too Archae.

unvote
vote: Hresz

[caelum]

EBWODP:

What I

think

is a misunderstanding

[caelum]

I'm still reading Wraith's posts but I'd just like to say

@Wraith: good post, but I feel that it should be more defensive oriented than offensive oriented at the point of the game. I feel like you should be claiming to us, not telling us who to lynch

Posts like these make me facepalm

[caelum]

My thoughts on Wraith as per requested by Mayor Archaebob

Didn't really think he did anything too incriminating up to post 404. Stated IRL issues prevented him from posting as actively as some of us are, stated that due to those issues some of the posts he made were based off of skims. Didn't think he was worth lynching over say; Moose/Bober/Tasky/Furcolow at the time. Now let's look at post 404.

I thought you had already addressed las preguntas de Foilst by excusing your actions with IRL issues but I guess I was wrong.

First, I will address foilist's other points in Post 233, which I seem to have ignored my first time around. I'm afraid I'm a very literal user of the English language, so I find many things are say are initially misinterpreted.

What I meant by the first part of that post was that AB's case was fantastically detailed and analytical for it only being page 2. Howver that did not warrant a vote for an early lynch on the 1/12 chance that we find scum.

Now, however, I'm perfectly willing to throw my vote around, as 17 pages is more than enough material to use Day 2.

On the second point, referring to my belief that archaebob was "flip-flopping," I refer you to the early push on boberz and then the sudden switch over to Furcolow. I noticed that now he has jumped ship to someone else and has seemingly dismissed Furcolow as a suspect.

That doesn't really explain anything. It sounds like what foilist was trying to get at, that you said that the case had merit but then contradicted yourself by implying that it had no merit by resorting to chance.

Second bit is interesting because it sounds like the only reason that you didn't vote was because you didn't want an early lynch as opposed to proclaiming that Archae's case has no merit along with the early lynch thing which you stated was your reasoning for not voting in the previous sentence. Sounds like you're trying to make your reasoning for not voting sound better by not including the chance bit - which is the bit that makes you seem scummy.

Archae has already addressed the flip flop issue, and I think he did so after your original post, so I'm not going to address this further.

I've just read Moose's analysis against me in Post 277. His entire case against me rests on his assumption that I am active lurking. See the first few sentences of this post. I'm getting the impression that Moose is the actual VI, since he doesn't seem to really read much and is making poor votes and accusations based on that lack of reading.

This just looks like an OMGUS because your case on him seems similar to cases made against Furcolow, the only difference being that Moose voted you and Furcolow has not.

Eh. I'll do the rest later + a more in depth comparison of Moose and Furcolow from what I see as Wraith's POV when I'm not as sleepy.

Tasky

Frankly put: your case on me is shit. I misread your post(s) so I stand corrected on your questions. Anyways, I really don't have the energy right now to rip apart your 'brilliance' but I'm just going to say if you seriously, honest to God can't see what's wrong with your case, I'm afraid we probably have another VI on our hands. There is a reason why no one is taking you seriously as of now.

Hresz

I'm voting you because pushing on Furcolow is useless, I don't want to push on Femm who is getting replaced, I'm afraid that Tasky is a VI and that pushing him will also be useless [if he continues his senseless crusade without any intention to scumhunt legitimately then I'll consider voting him], no one wants to vote Bober - and getting a pressured reaction out of him would super hard with only 1 vote on him (?), I'm considering voting Wraith but I want to hear Archaebob's super awesome super persuasive case first, I'm not going to vote Moose as of now, not going to vote foilst, not going to vote Archae, not going to vote a2, and not going to vote NB, and I want to get this game going which BW's will do + some of your arguments seem weak [see the 'fail town question'] etc. etc.

Need any more clarification?

I will be V/LA tomorrow, the 21st, but I'll be tired as hell when I get back so I'll probably read the thread but won't post

[caelum]

Mod, I will be V/LA until the 25th for emergency family reasons.

I think it's possible that you're both town, not sure if if that's correct though.

I don't think I need to fully rip apart Wraith's ISO on me as so much of it is so misinformed and confusing that I can't tell if he's dumb town or scum trying to twist evidence.
Ex.

ISOs Tasky (OMGUS) but votes Hrecz

Ans. Archae asked me to ISO Tasky and my conclusion was that he's either VI/scum and I don't want to bother with that right now for reasons explained in a previous post. Explained why I voted Hresz in the same post where I analyzed some of your post 404 so you either skimmed it or ignored the parts that weren't concerned about you.

I also have some qualms with his ISO on foilist and on Tasky, plus I need to finish analyzing post 404; so I'll get to that when I get back.

Oh, and yes Tasky. I

misreaded THREE DIFFERENT POSTS

. I 'misreaded' sometimes, sorry. :/

[caelum]

Back. Rereading, post tommorow.