Mini 388: DOOMsville II {Game Over!}

[klebian]

i've done a readthrough. This means I've got a good idea of what happened, but I don't think I was paying attention while reading to realize i should be thinking about scumscum. I'll probably read again later to look for scummy behavior, and I now recall noticing some posts (don't recall whose) that were kinda scummy, so I'll be a little smarter next read.

[klebian]

The thing was unrelated to everything. I don't see how it would inspire sympathy. I don't need your sympathy anyway because I am Unlynchable.

claim: Unlynchable Townie

Basically, I cannot be lynched, but I had hoped I would not have had to claim this on day one. But I am at lynch -1 and am automatically "lynched" at the deadline. If this so happens, I will not be killed and night will ensue.

post 371

[klebian]

unvote

as MBL pretty much cleared my suspicions of him. I need a reread, I would like to see what all adele/falcone (I think that is who she replaced) have had to say. I also would like to get a good read on turbo again.

How so?

[klebian]

The order is fine, but I don't see a consensus on massclaiming at all. It seems like you're trying to make it seem as if we agreed on a massclaim without anyone else saying they wanted to.

[klebian]

well, considering the fact that i'm not,

fos: turbovolver

...?

[klebian]

Er, is this because turbo claims I'm scum?

[klebian]

yo. I don't have the time (or if I do, then I don't have the willpower) to do a reread just yet. Meanwhile, I think it's better if I at least make posts in this game, and read and talk about what I can, and I'll do a reread on the weekend most likely.
Turbo, you say that post 425 was "a comment about mass-claims", but that post was more telling shadowlurker that he was trying to take control of the game. I know that he's already claimed, but scum could just have well spelled out 'i am a daycop' in a post to refer to later on if necessary.
I still haven't had my 'mincy little question' answered, for that matter. I don't like it when someone unvotes a vote that they apparently made with at least some solid reasoning, and then unvote, but don't explain why. I'd like to know what mbl did that made kilm not suspicious of him anymore from where she was before he responded to her.
In essence, what I've done since I made my first post is minimal, but I think you are trying to twist it a bit too much into my doing nothing, and not doing the reread I promised.

[klebian]

I have begun my reread and analysis, which I like doing simultaneously. The post should be done today, and if I don't finish, I'll post how much I've done so far.

[klebian]

OK, here's the reread as promised. (Day off from school today)

I think your all screwed in the head....

vote:friday-14th

reasons why i have that typo lol

this is not helpful

and throwing random votes are helpful?throwing accusions for utterly no reason is useful?well if that isnt useful either,then wtf do you mean in your mind is useful?

So why were you so offended by this? I mean you

were

joking around, right? Do you think joking around is in fact helpful towards finding scum?

Then again, perhaps you did achieve something.

Unvote: Ozymandius
Vote: Friday-13th

Friday's question seemed more like a newbie who apparently was under the impression that random votes are just how people begin, not for any use, and decided to do a 'similar' thing, by voting a nonexistant person. I think turbo was making too big of a deal out of a minor thing done by someone who just wasn't acquainted to the game.

Patrick sorta summed this up in post 50: "My take on it is that so far, Fridays play has not been helpful and the suggestion that random votes aren't helpful shows some lack of knowledge, but I've yet to decide whether this is newbtown or newbscum. " I think this was a more on-the-spot assessment as compared to turbo's.

This was discussed in the next few posts, and someone pointed out that friday had just won a newbie game as scum. Irrelevant without actually reading the game.

post 59:

So Turbovolver was the first to change their random vote, and immediately got voted by two others.

Ozymandius was the next one to change his random vote, and got voted for it by ShadowLurker.

Very interesting. I'll keep my SL-vote for the moment.

Why is this interesting?

What I actually meant with the comment was that it seemed strange that there seemed to be three people who thought an early vote change was vote-worthy (Rosso, Mert, SL). The two votes for Turbo could be coincidence, since they didn't came with reasons, but I doubt it.

SL's vote for Ozy definitely was a little suspicious, since the reason behind it ("votehops too much") is BS, while SL apparently intended it as at least a semi-serious vote, hence my vote for SL.

Patrick makes a valid point though, SL didn't mention Turbo who did the exact same thing SL accused Ozy of. However, Turbo is actually right that one shouldn't answer someone's questions for them.

Rosso, please explain why you think Sotty should be lynched.

plz stop trying to make masterpieces out of shit

unvote vote falcone

Now, I understand this was the first post after a crash. No one had posted for 6 days. Falcone was asked to explain what he found interesting, and when he responded to the question, shadowlurker called him out for this. I don't think sl's statement had basis; falcone thought it worth notable that many people were being voted for vote changes, and had even been asked to clarify.

Post 65:

sorry i couldnt post,forum said i couldnt acess and stuff....

be posting shortly

yeah umm...

These posts were made 6 hours apart. While I know he said 'shortly', 1) That can be interpreted different ways, and 2) Other players were just making "I'm here" posts, so I don't think it's correct to call someone out for not 'posting shortly' when others weren't as well.

SL, I don't quite get your vote for me. Is it because I used the first thing that was remotely interesting to try and start a discussion, or just because I voted you?

Both possibilities seem like not-so-great reasons for a vote.

Sl then called this a false dilemma and there was discussion over whether this was or not, and that SL had been avoiding the question.

ok, without much to go on in the first few pages. The person I find most scummy at this point is Shadow Lurker. She seems much to defensive with just one vote on her. So for right now I will

Vote: ShadowLurker.

Still watching this game, along with my others.

good defense kilmenator, i'll leave u alone for now

Unvote Vote Ozy

he's been lurking

This was SL's next post after people asking him to clarify his opinions. He unvoted FALCONE and voted ozy...

ok, without much to go on in the first few pages. The person I find most scummy at this point is Shadow Lurker. She seems much to defensive with just one vote on her. So for right now I will Vote: ShadowLurker. Still watching this game, along with my others.

You "killmenator" people at night, don't you?

FOS: killmenator

Seemed like a stupid and random post... Can't really explain why else this post was made.
Around a page of the next discussion is very random, and things irrelevant to the game were discussed, for the most part.
SL confirm voted someone he wasn't voting, and this caused confusion, and people started discussing whether he forgot, or whether this was a deliberate lie. This question was stated by Patrick, and it's interesting to note that SL didn't say anything about this being a false dilemma. Kilmenator made what I'd consider a sort of newbish response, and this made Patrick vote for her because he said she was just looking for reasons to vote SL, despite the fact that she was voting him for being too defensive, which was fairly unrelated to the topic which was then being discussed.
Patrick then said this: "If you vote Shadowlurker, you're saying that you think scum are more likely to lie about where they had a vote than a pro town player, which I don't think is true." This statement really seems like he's trying to make people not vote SL. He then says "All I can say is I don't find it scummy, and that behaviour like that can often make you the target for superficially thought out or oppotunistic votes." :Badposting:

Then for many posts, people argue against shadowlurker, and he eventually says that his inital arguement was to generate discussion. I've found that SL makes the excuse of 'generating discussion'. Kilmenator makes a comment about it was more suspicious HOW he generated discussion, and offered no lynch as a hypothetical better alternative.

Turbo responds:

I dont think it was the generating discussion part that got targetted. I think it was the way in which you generated the discussion. Why not throw out a No Lynch or something like that to generate discussion instead of how you were acting? And honestly I dont like how turbo seems to always be coming to the defense of SL. Maybe it is nothing, but I think that SL should defend herself because she is the one who put herself in this situation.

So, on to new topics. I would like to hear more from other people, and would like to hear their takes on what is going on.

I like the way you arbitrarily suggest no lynch as a better alternative to confirm voting somebody you aren't voting. Both are 'classically scummy' moves that are used early game solely to get things going, so I don't know why one would be better than the other. I get the feeling you don't either, and made that post up as you went.

Unvote: Friday-13th
Vote: killmenator

As for the defending ShadowLurker thing, I like to comment on everything I can.

that reasoning is just horrid. And that last sentence doesn't really seem right, since I haven't felt like he's been doing that; it seems more like he's been attacking newbie posts and defending experienced souding posts.

After the crash, turbo randomly brings up the fact that friday had voted only once the entire game, on rosso, and defends rosso. The vote had been made pages earlier, and this makes me think that turbo is just attempting to attack Friday on whatever basis he can.

Patrick then has a reread and calls it fruitless. Personally, my reread up to that point has shown a lot of things. I believe his reread was made with a fairly biased point of view.

Later, ozy remarks on this statement of kilm's "i didnt want to deal with another bunch of pages of stu[id arguments that go no where!" with "Kil, when you mentioned that you didn't want disussion, I find that odd, because I was thinking that any discusion helps the town" I don't really think this follows. I think there's a difference between discussion and stupid arguements that lead to nowhere.

This is around 10 pages. I will do the other 10 pages later. But I want to say that so far I see patrick and turbo seeming pretty scummy; however, there were quite a few players that I barely even mentioned due to lurking, and lurking so much that you don't make a substantial post AT ALL is I think just as bad as being active but making scummy posts.

[klebian]

I am too. I will respond to some of my rebuttals later, unfortunately, I have been fairly busy these last few days, and will be busy today as well, so it will take some more time for me to respond + finish my reread/analysis. In the meantime, I'd like if norinel adds at least something.

[klebian]

Seriously, what is with your rude responses? She found it interesting because apparently she thought patrick seemed to be pro-town, and thus she thinks that a protown dayvig wouldn't kill patrick. When you're going to respond, respond to the whole thing she says. All you're doing is picking on the newbie-ish players who apparently don't word things the way you would.

[klebian]

You do realize, kilmenator, that as norinel has said earlier, he replaced into the same situation as me, has posted a lot less than me, but no one's putting pressure on him. I know this is basically an ad hom arguement, but I don't really think it's fair that you're voting me because I haven't completed a re-read and analysis. I also note that you have BARELY responded to the first half of my analysis, and that was to say that I don't really note who's scummy, although I definitely called out turbovolver, patrick, and sl in my analysis.
As it is, I've been very busy and have had not much time at home lately. While this prevents me from doing a good reread without knowing that there's something else I'd be better off doing, I still like to at least be somewhat active in the game, because otherwise someone like you would call me out for lurking.
And kilm, although you may not have liked my last post, adele and norinel both responded to turbovolver's response to me, and essentially AGREED WITH ME. I really don't like how you've been playing today.

FoS: klimenator

[klebian]

Since I assumed klebian would be finished telling us who he thinks is scummy,

and since I did not really like that last post of his

, I will

Vote: Klebian

for now, and wait and see what happens.

vote: kilmenator

[klebian]

Did you not see a strange (dis)relation between her post 539 and the post i quoted?

[klebian]

Read kilmenator's post 539. Then read the post of hers that I quoted in post 540. Then report back. I'm beginning to feel like I missed something, but I sure think that we're both referring to the same 'last post'.

[klebian]

OH! Reading 512, 513, 514, 522 again, I see I misinterpreted you there. I'm deeply sorry for that. She said "I find it interesting that everyone else feels that it is a pro-town player who day killed him." and you responded with "I certainly don't." which I interpreted as 'I certainly don't find this interesting', which I consider a rude response.
Crap. I'm sorry about this incident.

[klebian]

i don't really get what you're saying, kilm. I'm trying to make you look bad? No, I'm just playing mafia... and the 2nd half of my analysis is not coming for a few days, at the very least. But I still want to play, and I have READ through the game once, at any rate..

[klebian]

i think i'll do it either today or sunday.

[klebian]

That's right.

[klebian]

i didnt put them at three because i find the discussion of a third vote useless

Ozy, you filled your post with too much filler. Pointing out that more talk is good is just worthless, everyone knows that. Kil already said they were going to reread and repost and asked for time, but you FOSed within a few hours.

Kilmenator was saying disscusion was useless. I was merely trying to point that out. Because everyone knows that more talk is good, right?

I didn't know you felt so strongly about an FOS...

I'm not saying we should lynch her now. My goal was just to let her know that I think she should do a bit more thinking before she posts to avoid confusion. I was and still am quite willing to give her plenty of time to work out anything that has caused confusion.

First, I already mentioned this, but the 1st point seems like misrepresentation to me. Second, I don't think that point was necessary to make. It seems like a hidden accusation and is just waiting for a bad response for a vote. 3rd: this was about kilm confusing games, but I think this was a pretty weird point, and it looks like another accusation in the guise of appearing helpful.

Hey, scrolling down to Turbo's post 257, I seem to have said almost the exact thing he did. I agree with this post.

Then bird and mert are modkilled, which is good because the godfather died, but kinda bad, because the watcher also died.

Kilm makes a pretty good summary of her opinions, and someone notes that she didn't vote anyone, but this is fairly irrelevant, I think.

Then there's some discussion between a few people (kilm, turbo, and adele mainly) and ozy about his responses. He makes a sarcastic comment that turbo doesn't like... Turbo makes good posts here, and ozy makes ok responses. Discussion is moderate, and nothing really scummy is going on, which people point out by saying that the only thing happening is turbo vs ozy which may even just be mountains of molehills.

Then post 309, ozy votes adele for "Falcone/Adele: Falcone produced a false dilemma, which I am not liking. Even if the reasons were the only two in his mind, that doesn't mean that there aren't other options, no mater how unlikely they are. And he seemed to present them as the only two possibilities. Plus, we haven't heard much from Adele, which I am not liking as well. " I disagree on both points. The false dilemma seems pretty strange to bring back, when it DOESN'T really seem as if those were the only possibilities. And then he doesn't like adele's not posting which she had already explained (post 308 "Sorry for my absence, I'm afraid I can't post now til later.") The false dilemma is refuted by adele, patrick agrees with adele, and sl votes ozy.

Then geraint posts (kinda near a deadline)

if ozy does end up getting lynched, it will be one of the worst lynches i have seen. just a truly poor game to try and get a 'fair' lynch from, if that makes sense. i'll be very disappointed if ozy goes (unless he turns up scum of course)
and if we get two new players, they'll have like 5 days to actualyl post, almost worthless this game makes me sad.

I'll be disappointed if he goes unless he's scum seems like trying to cover up that he already knows ozy will be scum. I don't like this post, the points against ozy were fairly solid, and he doesn't really say why he doesn't like an ozy lynch.

I have had a few vibes of geraintm defending Ozy, which I'll look back on tonight when I get in. I've noticed that when scum are under pressure they often become the world's biggest lurker hunters. Not that geraintm himself is under any pressure, but he is indirectly defending Ozy by attacking the inactives/lurkers.

Patrick, as we have both just been in Newbie 289 my postings in this game are very consistent in my actions back there. Look at post 61 from that game. And i have my vote on Rosso because i placed it there for a reason, and i tend to neeed a good reason to move my votes. I now have a reason

vote patrick

turbo - i know i didn't make much of a claim on my thoughts of ozy's scumminess. i didn't think my thoughts on the matter were especially important compared to the question on what i thought a fair lynch was.

I really don't like his point against patrick. Makes little sense to me. and his response to turbo doesn't make that much sense either.

turbo - i know i didn't make much of a claim on my thoughts of ozy's scumminess. i didn't think my thoughts on the matter were especially important compared to the question on what i thought a fair lynch was.

OK, now this I don't like. You don't want to lynch people until everyone can weigh in, but you don't think weighing in on the possible lynchee is particularly important. Doesn't make much sense to me.

Agree.

ok, lots going on here now. yay! my thoughts... i dont really like ozy's play much but am not comfortable with him not being around, so i really dont want to put a vote on him especially not knowing his role.

Pretty vague, and that 'especially not knowing his role' makes me think that she'd be partial to lynching off claimed townies...

What do you think Adele single focus has been and why do you think she has had that focus.

Pretty sure you're not reading the game carefully. Scum is much more likely to read carelessly.

I really don't buy the "not reading properly = scum" routine. There is nothing to suggest that townies wouldn't be lazy, nothing to suggest townies have better reading comprehension than scum, etc etc. The argument about scum only reading what concerns them isn't particularly true either, because there are definitely 'naturally defensive' townies.

Scum is also not likely to write that sentence you wrote to attract attention to a relationship between them and their partner. So I'm going to operate for now on the belief that Ozy and kil are scum and Adele is not.

I don't get it.

And you're "operating on the belief"? This sounds ridiculously sure of alignments, it doesn't have the 'townie doubt'. And unlike when people say stuff like "pretty sure X is scum", you don't seem to be saying it to provoke a reaction or be dramatic.
Townies don't "operate on beliefs", they keep their mind open and remain eternally curious until the scum are dead.


Still waiting for Ozymandius but I would also support votes for MBL at this point.

Still good responses from turbo, with MBL making posts I don't like after a long period of lurking and some people not liking this.

Then ozy claims unlynchable townie. Kinda awkward time to claim, but the lynch doesn't go through.

After night, when no one dies, mbl posts this:

Cool, we have some confirmed innocents or guilties. Who wants to go first?

Really really weird post. Don't like it.
(top page 16)

And that's all I have time for atm. Need to wake up in 6 hours. Turbo plays better in this part of the game, and his responses/attacks are quite good. SL plays ok, I don't like ozy's posting but he's unlynchable and someone said that unlynchable scum is bastardmoddery, so I suppose that he's confirmed. I also didn't really like geraint, he's basically lurking, but being fairly vague... Also don't like MBL, and I'm ok with kilm's playing. Adele hasn't posted enough up to this point of my analysis, so I can't say much. Sorry for still not being done. But it's more.

[klebian]

Tbh, if it was forced, I was just trying to not take too long of a time. I'll attempt to complete this today if possible.

[klebian]

Of course, there are sometimes roles where you're unlynchable

once

, aren't there?

Btw, sorry, but I won't be completing my analysis today.

[klebian]

Well, I've attempted to have a 'reaction' at the end of both analyses.. But I guess it's not really current.

[klebian]

You mean you understood it?

I still don't.

Like I said, how can he be knowing Ozy was already scum if Ozy

wasn't

?

But Ozy hasn't died yet. Maybe he

was

... er,

is

.

I mean, I think what klebian was getting at is that gerain's "I'll be disappointed if he goes unless he's scum" looks like someone trying to oppose a lynch but hedge their bets for the eventual discovery that ozy's scum and therefore gerain was opposing a lynch on scum.

Like, gerain's trying to push the "this is a stupid wagon" card but at the same time the "if he comes up scum, it's on record I never said he definately wouldn't" card.

Yeah, sorry, I guess that was badly worded. What I meant was, that saying "I'll be disappointed with this lynch (unless he turns up scum)" is fairly redundant. It seems like something scum would say, because it looks like this statement is overcompensating. I think the inclusion of this sentence in his post was scummy because it seems to me as if he's trying to sound as pro-town as possible while still opposing an ozy lynch.

I don't support lynching him, however. Like MBL said, lynching him would be fairly useless: we'd get little out of it unless we're lucky, and I doubt that will happen. However, with his claim, ozy should survive to endgame as scum have the benefit of knowing that unlynchable scum is a possibility and won't kill him.

I will see to reading over the rest of the game, and responding to any accusations I may not have.

[klebian]

Bah. Tomorrow, I'm pretty free. Will get to it then.

[klebian]

Mod, as discussion has picked up, I request a deadline extension

[klebian]

Meh. Less analyzing for me.