Mini 337: GRADUATION: Like, what now?

[Glork]

Vote: mlaker

[Glork]

Unvote
Vote: Glork

Dude's totally scum.

[Glork]

Unvote Glork
Vote: Ibby

Guys, I trapped a scumbag!!

[Glork]

I know I suck, but you kinda forgot to include "Vote" in that thing.

[Glork]

IGMEOY: Frozen Atlantic

[Glork]

Seriously, guys, Ibby is scum. You should be voting her. Like, now.

[Glork]

@ Simulpost

[Glork]

Unvote Ibby

(even though she's scum)

Vote: Frozen Atlantic

[Glork]

I'm tempted to vote Bonkers just on principle.

[Glork]

:verygoodposting:


Does this mean we can lynch Ibbyscum now?

[Glork]

Hum.

I have an inkling.

Unvote, Vote: Mlaker

[Glork]

...although, for the record, "I don't want to weigh in on Glork/Ibby" is effectively saying "I'm fence-sitting on purpose so that I'm not made to look suspicious earlier." That's kinda scummy, and a minus point for FrAt.

[Glork]

My point is he voted for someone (you) who had no votes while stating we need to lynch someone and commenting on wanting to pressure someone to claim.

People do that for a variety of reasons. Some of them just might be good for the town. *shrug*

So essentially he voted for you while talking about a Bonkers wagon. That still doesn't add up. Why not just vote Bonkers?

1. There were two wagons, yours and Sage's.

This is true.

2. You unvoted and voted mlaker to get a wagon started with no basis. You glossed over the fact that there were wagons on two people. Obviously you're not going to vote for yourself, but if you're in the mood to pressure someone to claim, why not Sage who is also at 3 votes? Your behavior is counter to what you're saying you want to do. I find that suspicious. That's why I voted you.

That's not necessarily a solid basis for a vote, though. People stay away from a wagon and put pressure on a completely different player for many, many reasons. Some of those reasons happen to be for the benefit of the town. You find his actions suspicious... I think I'll give FrAt the benefit of the doubt right now. To early to read him definitively, I say.

3. mlaker made a comment stating that he thought you wanted a Bonkers wagon, not an mlaker wagon. I responded to that because if that were true, why vote mlaker instead of Bonkers. NONE OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE STUPID JOKE.

Because the whole "BonkersWagon" was a series of *groans* over people who didn't like the pun? It was pretty blatant that FrAt was along for the joke. Had he

actually voted Bonkers

for it, I would've grown suspicious. But joking about it... eh, not so much.




Despite my little interlude, I'd like FrAt and Ibby to continue. I'm getting good information here... I suspect by the end of this exchange, I'll have a read on Ibby's alignment, and that just might lead me to get a feel for FrAt's alignment, too.

[Glork]

Raak! Hit the preview button, Glork! Ignore the first two quotes of that post. I was responding to Ibby's older post, then realized she had posted and decided that my response was as appropraite (or even more appropriate) for her most recent post. I forgot to delete those quote tags and that one-line response.

[Glork]

Oh, I don't mean necessarily at this moment. I mean continue the discussion in general in the near future. Keep on attacking each other. This shit's good for the town, yo.

[Glork]

Also, there goes my inkling.

Unvote Mlaker

[Glork]

Gone from Friday afternoon utnil Sunday afternoon/evening. Let's hope this thread has a little more life by the time I get back.

[Glork]

Vote: Rosso Carne

As Someone pointed out, I don't like the reasoning behind his Bonkersvote. He's voting Bonkers b/c Bonkers put someone three from lynch... but if it would take 3 mafiates to quicklynch, then Bonkers can't be scum.



Explain to me how that adds up.

[Glork]

Let's keep the game clean, everyone. The dripping sarcasm and debating over "insulting" posts isn't going to accomplish much either.


Anyway, I'm going to

Unvote, Vote: Ryanjunk

. I'm pretty sure that FrAt is pro-town -- his logic and play, once you get through his biting sarcasm and general annoyance -- is very solid and has a very constructive, pro-town feel about them. Of course, I could be fooling myself (or he could be fooling me), but FrAt is definitely not a D1 lynch.




Ryanjunk, on the other hand, very much fits the bill of a scumbag, from where I'm sitting. I'd love to see a Ryanlynch right now.

[Glork]

The rolling eyes indicates annoyance/irritation. Not sarcasm.

[Glork]

*Bumpity*

Also, at the spammah.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Sage

Start pointing fingers.




Still keeping an eye on Ryanjunk.

[Glork]

I'd like Ryanjunk to post more.

(Actually, I'd like a lot of people to post more, but Ryan's pinging the most right now.)

But really, his posts so far have been lacking in numbers, content, and inspiration. I'd like to see a good thorough analysis of what's happened so far from him.

[Glork]

You know what else I'd like,

Mod

?

MODPRODS!!!
Bonkers' last post: June 24
mlaker's last post: June 21
Paranoid Android's last post: June 17


Thanks in advance.

[Glork]

Is your vote on Sage for the same reason you stated earlier? That vote seemed to have been pretty joking in nature.

If you have any additional reasons for voting Sage, what are they? Feel free to share with us!

[Glork]

*Bumpity*

[Glork]

Gargantuan FoS: ParanoidAndroid

You're misrepresenting Sage's vote for you. The 8) smiley likely indicates that Sage was joking around. He may have "put words in [your] mouth" but his intent was not serious. You've OMGUSed him and made up two very flimsy excuses to keep your vote on Sage right now. There is one legitimate reason, IMHO, to be voting Sage -- his lack of serious conribution. But you're voting him for a misrepresentation that doesn't exist, for "being jumpy," and for... DEFENDING HIMSELF??

Explain to me how Sage has been jumpy (he's voted all of two people in the entire game).

Also, tell me how defending ones self is scummy. I always defend myself when someone presents a case -- however weak it may be -- against me. This isn't scummy.... it's playing Mafia.


In fact...

Unvote Sage

(and Ryanjunk... as far as I know, I shouldn't have two votes,

MOD

. Also, IGMEOY, RYAN!),

Vote: ParanoidAndroid

. Die, scumbag, die!


So yeah, D1 and I've found two scum already. Ryanjunk and ParanoidAndroid need to perish in, erm... ropes. *Sigh* Where's that One-Shot Vigilante when you need him...?

[Glork]

I'm going to hold my "inkling" to myself for now. Let it suffice to say that FrAt's posting made me think something. I then changed my mind about that "something" as FrAt continued to post, I read something else that made me change my mind.

ParanoidAndroid is about as overtly scummy as one can get. After a wrongly-based initial vote on Sage, PA has confirmed his stance while Sage was getting bandwagoned -- and the reasoning he voiced is complete bullshit. I'm willing to accept that PA genuinely misinterpreted Sage's meaning for the early vote. But as I've said before, Sage is not being "jumpy," nor is his self-defense in any way scummy. PA's looking to fuel an easy lynch. It's plain as day.

FoS: Everyone not voting PA right now

. Except FrAt. Ryanjunk is an acceptable alternative.

[Glork]

It's called an "analysis."

And no, it didn't just come from two one-liners. It came from everything I've read in the thread so far. Ryan's response to me isn't very inspiring either, as he basically OMGUSed me and the person I supported for having gone "Ryan and PA are scum."

[Glork]

You're not making any sense here, Rosso.

Nor are you voting for PA. Both of these facts have been noted.



Do you have any specific problems/issues with my analysis? Anything you'd like me to clarify?

[Glork]

I am not just responding to PA's most recent comments.

Try re-reading the whole thread, Rosso. I'm not going to spoon-feed you.

[Glork]

Mod: Have you made the modprods I requested in Post 106?

[Glork]

Ryan, I'm still preferring a PA lynch to you. There's still a chance I could change my mind about you.

And I'm not being defensive, silly. (Well, now I am kinda.) I'm just justifying my stance against you and PA. Nice misrepresentation there.

[Glork]

Read what he

has

said, and tell me two things.

1) Do you think the basis for his initial vote on Sage is well-founded?
2) Do you think that his reasons for keeping his vote on Sage are legitimate?

[Glork]

...That's not very helpful.

[Glork]

No, Rosso's just a moronic player sometimes. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt until I can convince myself otherwise.


The fact that Ryan and PA seem to be very united against FrAt/me is very telling one way or another, I think. I'd REALLY REALLY REALLY LIKE OTHER PEOPLE TO POST IN THE GAME (

Cue: FATty, Ibby, Bonkers, Mlaker, Someone

... ALL LURKING AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME) so that we can get some outside perspective. But I'll stake more than just my life that at least one of Ryan/PA is scum. Glorkdar Guarantee.

[Glork]

"FrAt seems scummy to me.
Glork defends FrAt. This is odd.
But I'm going to agree with Glork's opinion that the lurkers need to post more by FoSing all of them en masse."

Unvote
Vote: Ryanjunk

...I wish all mafia games were this easy.
I could WIFOM myself out of a Ryan/PA lynch because they are *SO* incredibly scummy, I almost can't believe anybody would be this bad as scum.

[Glork]

*High fives FrAt*


We've bagged a couple of them, haven't we?

[Glork]

Read the previous pages, Mlaker. You'll find the scum soon enough.

[Glork]

Glork, first of all, voting me is the worst thing you can do. Your reading into what I said WAY too much. I had my own reasons for voting sage, and I was just following along the posts, watching everyone argue while I thought about who it could be. I was content with my vote on Sage at the time, and thats all the explanation anyone needs.

No. That is not all the explanation anyone needs. "Having one's own reasons" is not a legitimate rationale. If you think that Sage is scum, you should find something genuinely scummy about him that you don't like. A gigantic misrepresentation and a bad one-liner with two bullshit excuses do not make for a reasonable explanation.


If you want to make me believe Sage is scum, make me believe Sage is scum. I'm sure you can do much better than what you've done so far. C'mon, give it a shot. Quotations, citations, and thorough explanations. You started to do it for me... now let's move on to Sage. Baby steps, PA. Baby steps.

[Glork]

...and since I didn't post the explanation earlier, this is the cause of my initial suspicions of ryanunk:

In addition to everything ibaesha just said, I'm keeping my vote on FA just because he looks really snappish and defensive, in my mind, which is scum-like. Just wanted to check in and point out that my random vote still stands, only now it's not just out of randomness.

Agrees with another player whose reasoning is... eh, kinda "meh."
Claims that being snappish and defensive is a scum trait. Why not be defensive if someone is attacking you?

...checks in at a time when momentum against FrAt is nearly at a maximum... very good time to fuel a bandwagon if you're scum.





Ryan's response... well, I've replied to those already.

[Glork]

*Sigh*


PA, I understand what you're trying to say now. I just wish you hadn't been so damned illogical all game.


Ibby, please move your vote to Sage or Ryanjunk. kthx.

[Glork]

....since when have you been a lurkerlyncher?

[Glork]

I really want to lynch Ryan today.

[Glork]

Since Light's Out.

You do realize that much of the lurking in that game was due to the survival mechanic, right?

[Glork]

I guess I just find it a little hypocritical that you say you're willing to go lurker-hunting after not having posted in this game in a solid week.

[Glork]

Wow, from this page it seems as if Glork is trying to divert attention from himself. Pretty scummy. I'll look into it more and vote later.

I agree Glork.

Vote ryanjunk

And why am I scummy? You can lynch me if you won't, I'm not an important role. I've been lurking but why was my post scummy?

Why do you insist on doing scummy, contradictory things like this?


You throw suspicion on me for keeping the game going and pressuring specific players, claiming I'm pushing attention *away* from myself. Then in your very next post, you bandwagon with nothing more than an "I agree with Glork."



Are you throwing your scumbuddy under the bus? If that is the case, it is much-appreciated.

[Glork]

I agree with Ibby wholeheartedly that being a mason does not allow you to play sloppy and end up in a situation where you have to claim. CES and I did this in Cultural Revolution and while it worked out for the better, it's rarely a good thing.

Rosso: My policy is that unpressured Mason claims get voted D1. One from lynch (I think) is definitely considered pressure.

Unvote
Vote: Ryanjunk

for the shameless bandwagoning.... and everything else. If that's hammah, he probably deserves it anyway. Final nail in the coffin, IMHO.

[Glork]

Oh, I hadn't switched to Mlaker?


The problem with an early mason claim, Rosso... *ESPECIALLY* in a Mini game... is that they allow the scum to go hunting elsewhere for power roles. This theory has been discussed over and over again -- yet Masons still seem to have a nose for getting themselves run up Day One (or claiming Day One for no apparent reason).

[Glork]

That's not to say that masons are weak, though. If played properly, they can be one of the best roles in the game. Most players just don't know how to play Mason properly.

[Glork]

I just read over some stuf... and I want to throw out a a loose

IGMEOY: Ibby

. She seems a little too willing to follow whilst only pointing out a couple of suspicions here and there. She could be trying to sneak past us as scum. Ibby's dangerous like that.

[Glork]

No, give him a full 24 hours. Depending on time zones, work schedules, etc., some peope may need more time to post.


For example, I just moved recently and yesterday we finally lost internet services at our old house. So I get a few hours in the evening at most. Imagine if you had said in the morning "I'll give him until 5:00 this afternoon to post" when I was on the chopping block. That wouldn't leave me a chance to post, and I'd be hammered without reply to no fault of my own.

[Glork]

G-Winger? The heck is that?


Elaborate, please.

[Glork]

IGMEOY: PA

[Glork]

Rosso and Ibby are atop my list right now.

Rosso has failed to contribute throughout D1, despite numerous opportunities to do so. He hesitated on the Ryanjunk lynch (In fact, he stayed off of it completely) and hasn't really taken a stance on anyone. The post in which I asked Rosso to give an opinion on PA's attacks ring out especially. He responeded with "eh" and "eh." That kind of noncontribution is not going to help the town. He refuses to think for himself, instead offering occasional side-comments and asking people and -- much more alarmingly -- conversation topics to "die." Why break down and curb discussion?
Additionally, Rosso made an "I'm going to keep a suspicious eye on our claimed Masons" post. Big red flag.
The "considering hammer" post makes me a little uneasy, but it's hard to tell whether he was being genuinely cautious or whether he was giving his scumbuddy a chance to talk/claim while appearing to want to lynch him.

Ibby danced around by voting Sage and PA, finally hopping on the Ryanjunk wagon when he made one last post. But she decided she wanted to "test my Glorkdar" -- a comment that I still find puzzling. The PA-over-Ryanjunk comment leaves a little bit of a sour taste in my mouth, as was her willingness to move from PA to Sage (instead of Ryan) immediately after I asked her to move off of PA.

I'd like

Modprods

on FATty ACid and on Someone. They're also on my list for chronic lurking. I'd like to know if they're even around still....

Finally, Sage is a definite lynch candidate. PA attacked him pretty hardcore on really bad reasoning. (Usually this happens when a Cop has a guilty result and tries too hard to get the player lynched, or a player overextends themselves as scum or a really overeager townsperson.)
At one point PA said he wasn't "100%" certain of Sage's guilt, but I wonder if that might have been PA taking sanity issues into account. It could be that PA got a guilty result on Sage N1 and finally came around to hammer Ryan when it became painstakingly obvious that Ryan was also scum.
Another interesting point is that Sage linked PA/Ryan/Rosso all together as possible Mafia group on D1 -- for attacking me. We know that Ryan was scum, and PA was not. Rosso might be the pivotal alignment here. It's generally accepted that scum will lump one of their buddies in a suspicious group of three. Or Sage could have been legitimately on-par with his suspicions.


But for now I'm going to go with logic/analysis instead of a *possible* guilty investigation result.

Vote: Rosso Carne, FoS: Ibby, IGMEOY: Sage

[Glork]

He probably stole one off of a dead body. That's sick, man. YOU'RE SICK!!

[Glork]

FrAt and Ibby, I'd like you each to evaluate a couple of things regarding Sage.

In Post 96 and Post 99, Sage outlined an argument against Rosso Carne. How strong do you feel this argument is? Also, FrAt, given that Sage has been on Rosso since D1, is it really that out-of-the-question that Sage would be back on Rosso today?

When I proposed both Ryanjunk and ParanoidAndroid as possible scum/lynch choices, Sage very quickly and somewhat firmly went after Ryan instead of PA. (Post 115 for quick reference.) Do you think that Sage was throwing a scumbuddy under the bus at that stage in the game? (You'll probably want to go read a little bit of context to know what was going on at the time of Sage's switch to Ryan.)


I'll post my own thoughts on these two subjects after Ibby, FrAt, and hopefully a couple of other players have weighed in.

[Glork]

Also, a quick "note to self" post.

Ryan may have had very telling/informative post. I'm not gleaning much out of it (except a *POSSIBLE* Ryan/Rosso connection, or a *POSSIBLE* Ryan/Sage connection... interestingly enough), but it could prove very useful later on.

[Glork]

I just feel like Rosso's general lack of content and failure to talk about *ANYTHING* substantial, while being contradictory and somewhat lurkerish is a bad sign. He hesitated and neglected to vote Ryan, even pleading with Ryan to talk. The wording of the post makes it sound like he was basically asking Ryan to do something to get himself out of the situation. If he were guilty of one -- maybe even two -- of these crimes, I'd be willing to cut him some slack.

But consider this: There has been basically no exceptions to the "lack of substantial content" accusation in any of Rosso's posts. Seriously. Read his posts, as isolated by the link provided. Then skim over the thread and look at the context in which he made those posts. He just isn't contributing. At all.

[Glork]

Do you have any opinions on anyone?

[Glork]

...who was it that said in Princess Bride Mafia that people who ignore joke sequences altogether are more likely to be scum than town? It was definitely true in CES's case in that game.

Rosso, I have another question for you: What was the purpose of your bashing of the "Someone joke" sequence? You say that it was contentless, pointless. Does this mean that you wanted actual discussion? If so, then why are you pushing for discussion and NOT PROVIDING ANY YOURSELF?

You say people need to talk about real things. Yet you continually failed to do so. Instead you curbed discussion at every opportunity, deeming it unworthy and fruitless. Do you not see the inherent hypocrisy that exists between what you "want" and what you're actually saying/doing?

Stupid Arguments >>> No Arguments. At the very least, they force plalyers to take stances on *something.* Besides, players tend to unwillingly reveal connections/alignments/habits when they think things are non-serious.
For example, Bonkers called mlaker his "friend" when FrAt wanted to push Mlaker to a claim. I don't know if that kind of breadcrumbing was intended to reveal Masonhood later on, but it gave us a clue about a connection between two players.

[Glork]

Ibby: I do have thougths on the question you just asked for everyone, but I'm going to hold them until we hear from the Mod regarding Someone/FATty (and/or until we hear from them).

I'm also going to request that Sage answer your question before FrAt or I do, as I want to see how he responds without being able to "ride coattails" as you have so eloquently put it.

[Glork]

I agree. It's making me both sad and angry. :/

[Glork]

.....well look who showed up.



The thing is, I can actually believe FATty's reason for not posting. She's told me in the past that she only follows watched topics and PMs. Just for the record...



Someone (the player) probably needs to be replaced. He was replaced in Committee Mafia, and I've not seen him post elsewhere in a long time.

I wouldn't mind seeing Mlaker/Bonkers prodded/replaced either. There is no excuse for players who just won't post/play the game.

[Glork]

So. How 'bout them Redskins?

[Glork]

How soon will that be, Mlaker?

I'd like to see a real post within 72 hours or I will ask the Mod to replace you.

[Glork]

So the two players who are trying the most to keep everyone involved, keep the game going, and get people involved and taking stances one way or another... they look scummy BECAUSE THEY ARE AGGRESSIVE??

The guy who was all over Ryanjunk's ass on D1, having called him out early and continually hounding/tracking Ryan's posts, and I led the final push that got him lynched. I'll agree that Ibby has looked suspicious for a couple of reasons, but aggression is not a scumtell. It's a play style. I'll also admit that while I have no qualms about throwing scum-buddies under the bus, to insinuate that I'm scum at this point is ridiculous. I feel that, had it not been for a coptell by PA that the scum must've picked up, I'd be the one laying six feet under right now.


For now, I'm content with one request: Explain *how* Sage's posting/wording style makes you think he's scum and/or not telling the truth. Go back through the thread and cite specific examples. Saying that you feel he's talking like scum isn't going to cut it right now.

Also, don't call yourself a confirmed innocent. Scum-claiming-masons gambits have happened in the past. While I think it's highly unlikely that you're scum, that's never a wise assertion to make.

[Glork]

He fucked up? I jumped onto him when there was *NOBODY* even considering him for a lynch. I then pursued him to the ends of the earth until I got the town to see things my way.
Pretty bold of you to insinuate that I jumped on a scumbuddy for "fucking up" when nobody else in the entire game seemed to have noticed the alleged "fuck-up." I'm sorry, but you can hang and rot now, scumbucket.



Ryan alread tried an unfocused and poorly-based insinuation that I'm scum throwing suspicion in the wrong direction. Go read pages 4-6 if you want to know where all the Ryansuspicion started off. It started when I attacked/voted him for a scumtell that I had not at the time divulged. It continued when he decided to throw an OMGUSy "IGMEOY" at me and was subsequently attacked/voted by FrAt/Sage. Now you're making the same mistake. Time to die, Rosso. Time to die.

[Glork]

Mlaker, I'd like you to respond to the request I made earlier:

For now, I'm content with one request: Explain *how* Sage's posting/wording style makes you think he's scum and/or not telling the truth. Go back through the thread and cite specific examples. Saying that you feel he's talking like scum isn't going to cut it right now.

[Glork]

Whoa, there bucko. We will not lynch a lurker today (unless we possibly lynch FATty for popping in, promising to read the thread, and disappearing again). I don't know if you've noticed, but STD has posted in the replacement thread asking for "at least 1" replacement.

In fact, much much more info would be obtained through either a Sage lynch or a Rosso lynch than any lurkerlynch we could go for.

FoS: Frozen Atlantic

for even bringing it up. I don't like that idea at all.

[Glork]

Hooray, a real player in the game!

[Glork]

Wait, when/why did Ryan "clear" Someone? Could someone point that out to me?

[Glork]

I don't think we can glean that information for sure right now. I find Ryan's claim of PP/Someone as innocent to be mostly neutral. If anything, I would lean slightly towards PP being pro-town, as scum rarely gambit by claiming cop and "clearing" their scumbuddy D1. Get credibility with townies for a day or two, then try to clear a buddy. Sneak him in there somewhere, but don't set most of your team to go down D1 on a disbelieved Cop claim.

[Glork]

I'd like Rosso to speak up on a lot of things. Prosperity Coins, why he dislikes discussion, what his role is, what his favorite food is, who he hired to kill PA, how he'd like to be killed by the town, what the meaning of life is.......

[Glork]

Hey Glork, how are you? Quick question. How come you were so obvious in Post 149 that you figured out what PA was saying? He only had one vote on him, so it wasn't really necessary from the perspective of saving his butt. I feel like that was a huge tip off to anyone who didn't get it. Apparently Ibby didn't pick up on it until you brought it out, so it wasn't like it was obvious. Why clue everyone in?

Because I decided that PA was town, strongly felt that Sage and/or Ryan were scum, and wanted to see the lynch go my way?

Additionally, I didn't want the focus of the discussion to be on PA anymore. When I pick out a pro-town tell, I'd rather move on to looking at someone I think is scum.

[Glork]

Actually, PP, declaring him pro-town was rather effective at getting discussion back on Sage and Ryan. After I said I understood what PA was getting at (he let off a loose cop-tell), the discussion turned right back where I wanted it.

[Glork]

I'm somewhat surprised that it took so long for someone to notice my self-vote. I wanted to see who was paying attention. Turns out that not a lot of you were.

I figured you were just joking around and chose not to dignify your post with a response.

Would you like to contribute for real sometime soon? Glorky would very much appreciate it! <3



Current thoughts on players:
DGB/Bonker -- Claimed Mason, I'd give about a 2.5% chance of being scum.
Mlaker -- Claimed Mason, I'd give about a 2.5% chance of being scum.

FrAt -- Has had a few inconsistencies, but he seems genuine in his scumhunting. I'm leaning towards thinking he is pro-town. Again, he could be fooling me, but I just don't feel it right now. The Glorkdar is getting virtually nothing. Give him 20% on the Glorkdar at the moment.

Ibby -- In some ways, she's played a pro-town game, and in other ways, she's just seemed either completely off-base or she's trying to lead us in the wrong direction. Came around late to vote Ryanjunk, and her confirm vote after his claim confuses me. I know not the purpose for it, but it's obivous she wans't subtlely counter-claiming him. Ibby returned to her D1 suspicion of Sage, despite saying that her D1 play was pretty shoddy. I find this very interesting, and more-than-slightly contradictory. I'm about 50/50 on Ibby right now. Ibbyscum chances would rise considerably if Rosso turns up scum, considering she opted to go with Sage over Rosso, after opting to go with Sage over Ryan D1.

Sage -- Oh boy... don't know what to think about him. Right now, I see the arguments that others have made against him, but I just don't think they're sound enough. Sage picked up on the Ryanscum stuff nearly as quickly as I did, and considering we've never played together, I don't believe he was playing "follow the Glorkdar" as scum. Sage has not played the cleanest game, but my gut is telling me that he is pro-town. 30% chance that Sage is scum right now.

Rosso -- Boy, this guy's a scumbag. After not contributing at all during D1, while clamoring for real discussion, he has failed to adequately respond to any of the allegations against him today. Short quips and a *horrible* attempt to paint me as bus-throwing scum don't help his case when he's in the hot seat. Rosso is by far my leading candidate for scumbag of the century right now. Even with the amount of pressure on him right now, it's like he's hiding out, hoping to ride out the rough parts until we forget about him. I would suggest that one, maybe two (depends on the current Vote Count) people pile onto his wagon even if it's just to get him talking more, or to force a claim out of him. The guy isn't doing the town any good right now. I'd give an 80% chance that Rosso's scum.

PP/Someone -- she seems interested in acquiring information from everyone -- even those she believes to be pro-town (read: myself). That's a very good sign, I think. PP's play here is vaguely reminiscent of her play in Mini 311 (before she got replaced), when she was pro-town. I'd give PP about a 15% chance of being scum.

MBF/FATty -- Can't honestly get a read on either of them. FATty's done nothing, and MBF has made a joke post. If Ibby turns up dry, or Sage turns out to be scum, then MBF would definitely be my last candidate for scum. I'd like to see some real, thought-out contributions from MBF in the near future. He needs to make a good impression after the sour taste FATty's play left in my mouth. I'd go about 50/50 on MBF right now.

Glork -- 0% chance of being scum. I'm pro-town, and you all should know that by now.

[Glork]

Mlaker, I pushed the Ryan lynch as hard as I could. I goaded, coaxed, bullied, and oppressed (such deliciously pro-town sounding words, wouldn't you say?) the town into keeping an eye on Sage and Ryanjunk, then led the final push (my second major attack) against Ryanjunk to get him lynched.

That strategy worked, and I've found clues pointing to someone else I think is scum. Why the hell wouldn't I push the town towards the lynch I want to see?



FrAt: Regarding Post 320, you need to learn that a change in opinion does not equate to a contradiction in stances/statements. Ibby has stated that she's revised her opinion on a player (me). You say she is contradicting herself.

This is a blatant misrepresentation of Ibby's words. This type of misrepresentation, given how you present it, leads to a Straw Man argument. You are taking her words, twisting them as you see fit, and presenting them in a light to make Ibby seem scummy (contradictory).

I have a question for you, FrAt, regarding this:

Here's what weirds me out. You and Glork bickered and voted and IGMEOY'ed for each other throughout D1. Glork FoS'd you in the beginning of D2. But ever since he emerged in a position of influence, you've been this dude's best friend and you've done everything possible to stay on his radar. This adds up? No sir.

Do you think that Ibby's buddying is most indicative of Ibbyscum, Glorkscum, or both of us being scum (or, hell, none of the above)? Explain why you arrive at the conclusion, please. I want to know what sort of logic you're following. Bold remarks and snide rhetoric are not going to sway me, as much as they may get under Ibby's skin and make her act irrationally.

An additional point I'd like to bring up:

Very well. So you "[find] it kind of unlikely they could be scum together at this point.", but wouldn't go after Rosso is Sage was town or vice versa?

I would not necessarily go after Rosso if Sage is town or vice versa. What you're setting up here is called a False Dilemma. You are presenting a limited number of possibilities (either Rosso is scum or Sage is scum) while ignoring outside possibilities (both are pro-town). You are using today's lynch to set up tomorrow's lynch, which is inherently seen as being scummy. If Sage turns up pro-town, we lynch Rosso as pro-town tomorrow, what do you do then? Go "oshit, i mustve been wrong"? Possibly. And maybe you would be wrong. But you would've done more than enough damage already with two mislynches (and an accompanying two nightkills, as we can assume). Being narrow-minded is not inherently scummy. But establishing multiple lynches on a logical fallacy, as you are doing in this instance, *IS* scummy. You can't pass it off as playstyle and expect people to go along with it. Twomz is pretty well-known for always being scummy, but many players (myself included) *NEVER* let him get away with continued scummy behavior without noting it, voting him for it, or pushing a lynch on him for it. Why? Because scummy play is scummy play, regardless of the character behind it.

One more thing: Note, FrAt, in the post that you quoted that I said it is

REASONABLE TO BELIEVE

that one of Rosso/Sage are scum. I did not speak in absolutes, as you did. I did not say "if one is lynched as town, I will be going after the other under the assumption that one of them is scum."

This is a significant difference between what I said and what you said.

And yet you claim we say the same thing, and that Ibby is using double-standards. The entire premise of that point against Ibby is completely and utterly flawed. You have no basis whatsoever for this attack.



I find FrAt's recent posts to be very disturbing. I don't care if Mlaker thinks that Ibby and I are scum, and I don't care if he continues to think so. He's wrong and, if/when the time comes to prove him wrong, he can hang his head in shame for buying into FrAt's bullshit. FrAt is Strawmanning by attacking Ibby's language and twisting around what she says to make her sound contradictory, and using false premises in an attempt to undermine her position. Considering Rosso was the leading votegetter when this all blew up (and he still is, in fact), I see it as being distinctly possible that FrAt is stirring up a lot of dust all of a sudden in an attempt to shift focus away from the debate that is going so horrendously against his scumbuddy. Momentum against Rosso has been building, and now all of a sudden FrAt is splasing about using crap logic, Straw Man arguments, and aggressive rhetoric in an attempt to fluster Ibby (which has, admittedly worked, but does NOT make Ibby any more likely to be scum -- heck, for those of you who read the exchange between her and Olio in Lights Out, that was the final factor during my re-read that made me decide she/PBuG were more townie than SpeedyKQ).



I'm still happy with a Rosso lynch, but I see an alternative in a FrAt lynch. The man has just skyrocketed on my list.

[Glork]

Thus if the town follows Glork again it's Rosso today and FRaT tomorrow. Glork, all I'm telling you is that you push way too hard. Chill out. Don't dominate entire pages of dialog. It looks to me that by doing so you're blocking out any other possibility of a lynch except the person you want to lynch. Ryanjunk was ultra scummy, If the mafia had any sense they would throw him under the bus. You are obviously a smart player. I don't see attacking a very scummy player as clearing you as you implied that it should.

....


Mlaker, I've already pointed this out, but look back at my initial vote for Ryan. Nobody was anywhere close to supporting my attacks on him until he decided to OMGUS IGMEOY me. I picked up on a scumtell that *NOBODY* else had seen at all. How can you possibly insinuate that Ryan was "ultra scummy" and that busing him would be the obvious play?

[Glork]

If you want meta on me, Mlaker, go look at Cultural Revolution. I got you nailed D1, sniffed out Fritz D2, and ousted SOS and Y on D4 and D5 respectively. All using my hyperaggressive style.


I guess what I'm trying to say is

get it out of your head that extreme aggression equates to scumminess

. Some people just play that way. I sure as hell do, and it oftentimes works for me. I'm not going to change it regardless of how scummy you thin the style is. So. Get. Used. To. It.

[Glork]

Okay. Since Rosso seems too high-and-mighty to address my points against him and provide any kind of defense for himself, I'd like everyone else in the game to address my points against him.

Here are the posts in which I've made attacks on Rosso:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 282#406282
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 104#407104
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 212#407212
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 670#415670

Just read my posts, look over Rosso's posts (linked in one of my posts), and let me know what you think. Note in particular his clamors for discussion, but refusal to provide discussion. Note his attacks on my attempt at an analysis. Note his aside to Ryan, his sidenote requeset that Ryan defend himself. Note his "don't look at me, look at FAtty the lurker" attempts to sluff suspicion off of him. Note his failure to address any of my points directly and thoroughly. Note his attempts to accuse me of throwing an "obvious" Ryanscum under the bus,

when, as I have already explained (and as PP can testify to), there was *NOTHING* against Ryan when I started attacking him

.* Note his continuance to cast doubt on me, saying he wouldn't put it past me.

Seriously, for the love of God. Can somebody explain to me why Rosso isn't scum? Because I truly and honestly can not understand it.


*Mlaker: You say that Ryanscum was obvious, and that any smart mafiate would have thrown him under the bus, as you accuse me of doing. Yet earlier, when I was attacking Ryan, you said I was simply trying to divert attention to myself, AND THEN A TWO DAYS LATER YOU AGREED WITH ME THAT RYAN WAS SCUMMY. This is not the "it's obvious that Ryan was scum" sitauation that you claim made me bus him. This is you believing that I was stirring up dust, and then going "ohcrap, Glork was right." Obvious? Hardly. I did not

bus

Ryanjunk. I

busted

him.

[Glork]

PP -- FWIW, I think that Ibby might be pro-town. The way she reacted to FrAt's attacks just gives me that vibe. Like I said, it reminds me of how she reacted to Olio when Olio was being a jerk in Lights Out. 's about all the meta help I can give you.

[Glork]

Well, I wouldn't say it there were any unmatched records involved... but yes, that was one of my better games to date.

Funny, I was wishy-washy about Ibby then, too, and ultimately (in endgame) arrived at the conclusion that she was pro-town. I seem to have done the same thing here. Coincidence? Possibly. I doubt it.

[Glork]

Hooray, Rossoclaimtime!

[Glork]

I'm not blocking people from saying who they want to lynch. I'm just telling them that they're wrong.


Seriously, though. If I thought there was a better lynch out there, I'd go with it. I'm perfectly willing and able to listen to and follow others. I just think that the Rosso case is the best one we've got going right now... by a pretty decent margin.

[Glork]

SUPER DUPER CONFIRM VOTE: ROSSO

People who don't claim when at one from lynch are asking to be hammered. I don't care if you claim Townie, Doc, Super Saint Death Miller, Deputy, Roleblocker, Lingerie Model, or Santa Claus. Claim something. It can't hurt your case, can it?

[Glork]

MBF, I consider Rosso to be suspicious enough that he is worth lynching today, above anyone else. If you have a case against Ibby, make it tomorrow. Making it on the eve of Rosso dying smells like a distraction to me.

QFFT!!!

Didn't I say that IbbyInnocent implies MBF is Rosso's last scumbuddy? Oh yeah, I did!! My 50/50 regarding the last scumbag, has switched to 70% MBF, 20% Ibby, 20% somebody else.






....'cause I give 110% every game!

[Glork]

I'm a little surprised/disappointed that it was one of the players I suspected less (FrAt was #3 on my list behind Ibby/MBF)... but that works fine by me!

Vote: Frozen Atlantic

Well played, town.
I hope you all learned a valuable lesson: Never doubt the Glorkdar.

[Glork]

Actually, if I was scum, wouldn't the lesson be "Doubt the Glorkdar"?

I think it'd be "follow the Glorkdar so as not to look crazysuspicious, hope that Ryanscum doesn't go 'Glork and FrAt might be connected. I'll go after Glork more, though!' and then nightkill me as soon as possible."

Unvote

. I'd like to hear a claim, just for amusement value. I expect a damned good one, FrAt... Something that would be worthy of "Funniest Role Claim."

[Glork]

Who have your targets been each night?

[Glork]

Even on the night before he was outed? Y'know, that night that happened before there were any days? Or lynches? Or mason outings?

[Glork]

I donno... you know what Unnightkillable and Investigation-Immune abilities sound like?

Godfather abilities.




You know what else I don't like? The fact that you talk about being investigation-immune at all. If you were pro-town, what would you have to worry about being investigated? Are you a Miller Hider? Does your emoness make people inherently see you as an enemy?

[Glork]

Meh.

Vote: FrAt

. I was planning on doing that regardless of what you claimed, and your responses have certainly been far from inspiring.





Plus, you're emo. I hate you. DIE!

[Glork]

FrAt, you should just self-hammer and get on with your life. Er... your death.

[Glork]

See you? Excited. Jittery. You're like that chick from the end of Pulp Fiction...

And soon you'll be like Zed.




Dead.

[Glork]

Oh, that's right, you *ARE* like Samuel L. Jackson.








Because you have a gun!

[Glork]

PARAGON'D!!!

[Glork]

I'm still disappointed that Glork and ibby are the JP Morgan and the John Rockefeller of MafiaScum but at least we win.

Vote Frozen Atlantic

I still think you're being ridiculous. There is *NOTHING* wrong with being aggressive in a game. Is this game not proof that the aggression works if done properly? Isn't the purpose of being a pro-town role to find scum, then get the town to lynch (or otherwise kill) the scum?
Interestingly enough, the biggest pro-town posters were Ibby (busted FrAt), Sage (found Ryan/Rosso connection) and Glork (busted Ryan/Rosso). Like I said... aggression isn't scummy. It's just a playstyle.


FrAt: I'm disappointed you had no witty retort when I outdid you regarding the Pulp Fiction references. Don't try to pick on Ibby ever again, buster.

[Glork]

btw, I was the Doctor. I guessed that, if I didn't die, it would be because scum WIFOM'd themselves out of killing me ("There's no way Glork won't be Doc-protected!") and would go after a Mason. DGB seemed to be playing better/smarter, so I protected her. I'm assuming that FrAt tried to kill DGB N3.


Nights One and Two, I protected Ibby. N1 because I <3 Ibby, and N2 because of her confirm vote (basically a counterclaim). Though PA was the actual COP, Ibby's role was very coplike. Up to that point, I'd pegged PA as cop (hence my request that Ibby move her vote away from him when I realized it), but it made me switch.

When PA died as a cop, I naturally came to suspect Ibby. The whole "coming around to vote Ryan after he seemed doomed" thing didn't ease my suspicions of her.

[Glork]

FWIW, I thought the Rosso hammer was a little iffy. With the town clamoring for a claim, hammering him like that (*especially* with the accompanying picture) -- REGARDLESS OF HIS ALIGNMENT -- is usually a scumtell. It's either scum hitting a townie too eagerly, or scum wanting too eagerly to appear pro-town. For various reasons, I still had Ibby above you on my list, but you weren't really helping your own case.

Still, you were the only one who played even decently in what turned out to be a pretty sorry excuse for a scumgroup. Props for that, FrAt.
Ryan's blatant "Glork + FrAt!!" posts implied a connection between the two of you, especially when he ended up focusing on me a lot more. (Yet somehow, all game, I missed this fact COMPLTETELY... hindsight is always 20/20...)
Rosso's turning on you was idiotic. He basically voted you for no reason at all (being mean to Ibby is *NOT* in and of itself a reason to vote for anybody), and again... in retrospect, that's more a distancing/bus-throwing tactic than a legitimate suspicion.

I had also noted your failure to address my dismantling of your attacks on Ibby, FrAt. Next time you see an analysis like that from me, you would do well to explain yourself. Or just use sound logical arguments in the first place, rather than tangential attacks on a player's character and posting habits.

Another thing:

Glork stays - He has a great eye for subtext. This is his strength and weakness. I'll convince with what I DO, not what I say.

I don't think this really works/applies when there's only one scum left. Either you DO (find/lynch the scum) or you do not (find/lynch the scum). Once there's only one scumbaggo left, most good players won't pay as much attention to current happenings as go back and look at everything that happened *before.* Expecting to be killed, I didn't give the game much of a re-hash overnight. But looking back now that it's post-game, I can find discernable clues connecting you to both Ryan and Rosso.

For a newer poster, you seem to have a good touch for the game, FrAt. If you could just refrain from being a sarcastic ass to other players, I'd be willing to play with (or against) you again sometime.

[Glork]

It just makes things unpleasant sometimes.

People have requested replacement (or been outright replaced by mods) in games due to personal conflicts that started/blew-up/whatevered in a game thread. And my personal opinion is that these sorts of conflicts are distracting to the game itself. I generally find them scummy, and (as I did with your posts) try to pick through the surface tension to see if there's any meat behind such an attack. Usually there isn't.


So, yes.... though bantering, sarcasm, and one-upsmanship is fun and perfectly acceptable in moderation, I think you went a little overboard this time around.

[Glork]

^^^ That was directed towards FrAt, obviously. ^^^

[Glork]

Say the aggressive players. If you were mafia we would have been screwed because of your aggressiveness. I rest my case. I don't think I'm wrong but obviously you do.

Actually, if I were Mafia, the game would've panned out completely differently. The only way I would've screwed you over as Mafia is if I really had bused both Ryan and Rosso on D1 and D2. In which case, I would have absolutely deserved the win if I could've pulled off a WIFOM that big.


Seriously though, if a player busts scum on D1, the sensible reaction is not to assume that he's bus-throwing. You keep the possibility alive in the back of your head, but you go "okay, let's see what he does this time around." If it looks like he's leading you around going "But I found scum D1, I found scum D1," *THEN* you go "Oh, he's probably scum who bused his buddy!" A good player will *NOT* turn around on D2 and attack the guy who led the scumlynch D1. A vast majority of the time, it doesn't make any sense at all.

[Glork]

So... was PA paranoid or insane? Because Cop, Gunsmith, 1-Shot Vig, Doc, Mason, Mason, Townie, Townie, Townie, Mafia, Mafia, Mafia doesn't seem right if the Cop was sane.

Also, did all 3 Mafiates have "guns"?

[Glork]

[Glork]

N1 I protected Ibby.