Mini 740 - Communiqu├® Mafia 2: Game Over and the Winner is..

[hohum]

Vote: Casey

nobody is quick-lynching. With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch. Last I checked he was at L-4.

[hohum]

EBWOP:

Vote: Casey

[hohum]

Assign motivation to Casey please Hohum.

Assign motivation? What does that even mean?

Are you trying to get me to justify my vote?

If so, I'm not going to justify a random vote.

[hohum]

Holy thread stall, batman!

[hohum]

it's a random vote. I never claimed i wasn't. Also, what was I called out on exactly? Ectomancer's post was a fragment of two sentences thrown together. It didn't make sense, that's why I asked for clarification.

Seriously, we're uh, 2 pages in now?

Unvote

FoS: roffman

for reading more into a random vote than what is actually there.

[hohum]

vote Hohum

for even thinking that calling that a random vote was going to fly.

Assigning motivations means that you can't just call an action scummy and place a vote, you've got to explain why scum, and in particular the player you just voted, would have motivation to do it.

I'm not even going to bother trying to explain the multitude of reasons why you're wrong. It isn't going to matter what I say now. Simply because I attached some weak reasoning instead of some lame joke to a random vote, you've gone and developed tunnel vision.

If you REALLY want to pick up this wagon and push it, fine. I'm not going to bombard the thread arguing with you, so enjoy your one sided fight.

Oh and BTW, latching onto such WEAK justification for a vote this early in the game is definitely a scum tell.

FoS on roffman stands

FoS: Ectomancer

[hohum]

This is anything but scummy, this is called scum-hunting. Do you really expect strong justification for a vote to occur early in the game?

So why is his weak justification grounds for me to be wagoned, and my weak justification also grounds for me to be wagoned?

[hohum]

Ectomancer, get off your high horse. You have no right to talk to me like a child no matter what your suspicions of me are. I will send my day communique to anyone I damn well choose. If you can convince 6 other people that doing so is scummy then I don't want to be a part of this game anyway.

QFT.

I'm on the fence about this plan still. I need to put some more thought into the mechanics of the game.

I will say one observation I've made so far is Ecto is WAY too eager to steer the town, and he's basically trying to cast a shadow of doubt over anyone who disagrees with him.

[hohum]

@Casey: I don't understand how you can proceed with this plan while there's still people who haven't agreed to this. I can think of more useful way the town can use their communique. You've got at least three people in that list who are either on the fence or in opposition.

The more I think about the mechanics of the game, the less I'm fence sitting about it.

This whole idea REEKS of scum tactic. The scum are trying to get the town to burn any potential advantages of day communication.

Once this line of communication is complete, what is this going to tell us exactly?

[hohum]

other than the town can be lead around too easily, that is.

[hohum]

Vote: Casey

[hohum]

Answer my question first and then I'll answer yours.

WHAT "vital" information is this going to reveal to us?

[hohum]

it's only you and ecto really pushing this plan. You've only managed to convince other

people

sheep to follow along.

[hohum]

Casey has a valid point Hohum. Why are you concerned about us having a better view of your alignment? I see no reason why you wouldn't want town to know you are town seeing as scum already knows, unless of course you are already scum.
Shall we lynch you on the basis of a rumored one-shot cop investigation on you?

I've stated what my beef is with you Juls. I don't like your action if it was as stated, and it is such a weak excuse that I believe the chances are good for it to be a lie.

Since Hohum (suspiciously) doesn't want the plan, and Juls (also smoked out during this process) doesn't like it either.

Let's get a real show of who supports this. This is also a good activity check. If we don't get answers within 24 hours we start asking for prods.

YES

to directing today's communique's.

Neither of you have yet to explain exactly what this is going to reveal. How is burning the town's ability to communicate during the day going to reveal anything about anyone's alignment?

[hohum]

The system breaks down if someone lies, then we have to go through the process of counterclaims, and it's going to be a mess but potentially useful. Since I seem to be the only one still opposed to this idea, I'm going to shut up and send my message.

[hohum]

also it doesn't appear as if we've heard anything from magicrabbit in a while

@Mod: can we get a prod?

I want to make sure my message target is alive before I send.

[hohum]

Unvote

[hohum]

So you're saying find the ones involved (or potentially implicated), put a big bold mark around them and keep going?

No, I'm saying that hopefully, after we find who sent the message, we'll be able to get that person to talk (and hohum to talk) and determine if the message is the truth or a lie.

Why the hell am I being singled out? Have I not been active in this thread?

Jesus. You and Ecto are tag-teaming me.


I just got my communique from ecto, password plain

'bout to send mine off

[hohum]

I see.

Thanks.

BTW, Ecto is rolefishing. Scum Scum Scum

If you have a role you can't claim - password secret
If vanilla - password plain
Tell me tonight

[hohum]

mod hasn't picked up my communique PM yet.

Unvote

Vote: hohum

Since I've been targeted.

[hohum]

Vote: hohum

[hohum]

@hohum, why the self-vote, it is pointless and helps nothing?

Hohum, you were the one that was targeted by the "one-shot cop". The proposal is to kill both of you so that we are guaranteed to catch scum. If the cop is legit, you are scum. If the cop is not legit, he/she is scum. Therefore, we trade 1 town for 1 scum.

Neither of you have yet to explain exactly what this is going to reveal. How is burning the town's ability to communicate during the day going to reveal anything about anyone's alignment?

Heh, that's easy cheesy. We expose who sent in the guilty result, we lynch both of you and we have a 1 town for 1 scum exchange. That's good for us. You should be happy to die for the cause.

I agree, and when I flip town the cop will be outed as scum.

I'll help you do some scum hunting in the mean time though.

[hohum]

I sent my message.

And the entirety of my message was:

"If you have a role you can't claim - password sample"

I don't know exactly what hohum (if indeed it was) was doing there

that's correct.

[hohum]

I agree, and when I flip town the cop will be outed as scum.

Hohum, please read. You won't flip anything when you get lynched. This is a no reveal game.

Do not try to end this day before we're done with it.

Here's the current status:

No info received yet:
Magicrabbit --sends-to--> Reecer
Reecer --sends-to--> RossWillam

Claimed to have sent:
Hohum --sends-to--> Magicrabbit
RossWillam --sends-to--> Braeden

Code word posted:
Roffman --sends-to--> BSG
BSG --sends-to--> Juls
Braeden --sends-to--> Budja
Budja --sends-to--> Casey
Casey --sends-to--> Dorvaan
Dorvaan --sends-to--> Ectomancer
Ectomancer --sends-to--> Hohum

I'm not trying to end the day. Obviously I'm nowhere near a lynch right now. Stop trying to paint everything I say and do negatively. Here's a little hint for your future games: If I'm already covered in shit throwing more on me isn't going to make it stick any better.

I'm convinced that casey is scum, who is making every attempt to buddy up to ecto so that he can hide behind other people's cases and come off looking pro-town

[hohum]

So now we have Reecer left. I would like you to stop stalling and take care of business or admit that you can't.

Hohum, the Casey is scum attack looks to be based upon my townie status. Do you see anything wrong with that?

Let me be clear, I'm more frustrated with casey than I am suspicious. I just lobbed a bomb. It's too early to tell for sure whether either of you are going to flip scum, but if I were forced to chose between the two of you right now (your rolefishing aside) I'd chose casey.

[hohum]

I agree, and when I flip town the cop will be outed as scum.

Hohum, please read. You won't flip anything when you get lynched. This is a no reveal game.

Do not try to end this day before we're done with it.

I'm not trying to end the day. Obviously I'm nowhere near a lynch right now. Stop trying to paint everything I say and do negatively.

I can't paint things negative when they're already negative to begin with. Voting for yourself pushes the game closer to ending the day. L-3 is somewhat close.

Your desire to not find your accuser is very confusing. Why are you against this?

I'm convinced that casey is scum, who is making every attempt to buddy up to ecto so that he can hide behind other people's cases and come off looking pro-town

If I'm buddying up, as you say, it's because I (as well as most others) approved of his plan.

If I recall correctly, Ecto was the one who nominated me to organize the plan. I've been trying to fulfill these duties. It feels like you're singling me out because I'm taking the reins. Well, so be it. I want to actively help find your accuser, which, at this point, appears to be either Reecer or Roffman.

Just by analyzing writing styles, the message doesn't feel like it came from Reecer.

Still waiting on Reecer...

So you're using the fact that someone asked you to do something as an excuse to blindly follow and ask no questions. I at least asked a few questions before I drew a conclusion. You just blindly followed suit. Now you attack me for every post I make simply because I started off in opposition to the plan. Sounds like opportunistic suspicion and buddying up to me.

[hohum]

I've put up with it for a while, but I'm getting really tired of you accusing me of things I haven't done. I have informed you, I have advised you, I have questioned you, and I have observed you. But nowhere have I made a case against you.

On top of this, you completely evaded my question. Why are you against finding your accuser?

I can only pinpoint your behavior as evasive and unusually aggressive. Your understanding of this particular game feels like it's near Reecer's level, and to me, you show no desire to learn.

I really wish Reecer would hurry up.

I never once said I didn't want to find my attacker. I also never once said I wanted to end the day to end. You're putting words into my mouth.

Voting for yourself pushes the game closer to ending the day. L-3 is somewhat close

You're wrong. Do you see people piling on my wagon after me right now? I sure as hell don't. Rather than you growing up a little and admitting that you're wrong you'd rather resort to ad-hom attacks like this:

Your understanding of this particular game feels like it's near Reecer's level, and to me, you show no desire to learn.

[hohum]

Your understanding of this particular game feels like it's near Reecer's level, and to me, you show no desire to learn.

You, with less than 100 posts to your credit and no completed games that I can see and a signup date 6 MONTHS after mine, are saying this. Wow. What a bitch.

[hohum]

Okay, two completed games, my bad.

[hohum]

My interpretations of your actions mirror Casey's Hohum. They are illogical if the given in the equation is a townie hohum.

Well you're both dead wrong, and your actions I still find considerably scummy. If the rest of the town wants to blindly follow you until they're picked off one by one that's their problem. The only good thing about this game is I'll be lynched out of it soon.

[hohum]

Wow. What a bitch.

That was offensive,

sexist

, and completely unnecessary. I can't put up with this any more.

Vote: Hohum

Once again you evaded my questions. Are they not good enough for you because they came from a woman? Fine, don't answer them.

I hate you. I hate you so much. You are an oppressive male bigot.

I quit.

You're the one who started with the high and mighty attitude, not me.

[hohum]

but seriously. Don't quit. How do you ever expect to overthrow your oppressive male overlords and create a perfect feminist society if you run away every time one of us say something you don't like?

[hohum]

I agree with ecto that if hohum is not town, it is an extremely intelligent tactic for scum to employ, and probably means the town is going to lose very quickly. As such, i'm inclined to say hohum is town unless overriding evidence presents itself to the contrary.

BTW, if anyone accuses me of fabricating the message, if i was scum i would've not mentioned juls message, and then hung them both out to dry. This being no-reveal would have most likely gotten 2 free lynches, leading to a near certain scum victory.

This post strikes me as a little odd. Why the plea for townie points? Why are you trying so hard to paint yourself in a positive light?

[hohum]

This post strikes me as a little odd. Why the plea for townie points? Why are you trying so hard to paint yourself in a positive light?

It's not a plea for townie points. It's an explanation of my future actions, as well as a pre-emptive defense against any attacks on me that may waste time.

Townies don't usually do anything preemptively. There's no need for a pro-town role to do things preemptively, because scum hunting is about investigation which by nature involves hindsight.

Why such concern about wasting time? The more that we discuss things the more information we have to go on as a town.

[hohum]

Good breakdown. It buffers my own position. On a personal level, Hohum really deserves a good lynching. On a competitive level I won't touch him because all of the clues we have point to scum sending that message to Roffman.

Anticipating an attack on your motives and pre-emptively providing an answer is not a bad thing, and this:

Why are you trying so hard to paint yourself in a positive light?

is just asinine.

If everything I say or do is so asinine then FFS why don't you just lynch me? You may nor like my play style but I am entitled to an answer to my questions before you pick them apart.

[hohum]

Ecto,

Don't like it when someone is a douche back to you? How does it make you feel? Not very good right?

I don't know why that was necessary. The mod already warned us.

If you want to turn this game into a pissing contest I'd be more than happy to oblige. I just tried to contribute positively by asking roffman a few questions. Don't accuse me of lurking when I stop trying to scumhunt because you jump all over me every time I try to probe someone for information.

[hohum]

Ecto,

Don't like it when someone is a douche back to you? How does it make you feel? Not very good right?

I don't know why that was necessary. The mod already warned us.

If you want to turn this game into a pissing contest I'd be more than happy to oblige. I just tried to contribute positively by asking roffman a few questions. Don't accuse me of lurking when I stop trying to scumhunt because you jump all over me every time I try to probe someone for information.

Your comment wasn't necessary, but you did it anyhow. I don't care if the mod did warn you, I'm telling you that I'll make this really not fun for you if I see conduct like that. Quit whining about being called out on it. Cursing at a girl, calling her a sexist term with no provocation. Seriously. WTF is wrong with you?

Unvote

@Mod: Please replace me

[hohum]

I'm not going to apologize for an argument that I didn't start.

[hohum]

@Ecto: I don't know who you think you are but don't treat people like they're your children. That's what mods are for.

[hohum]

It's not necessary for you to leave Hohum. I said my piece on the matter as a man should. Act civil and you won't have any issues with me. Stay. You're very near to confirmed town anyhow. I'll cut you some slack.

A warning, though: If he makes any more sexist comments, I'm asking to be replaced out.

Ecto:

I don't like abandoning roles but I'm not willing to deal with childish comments any more than casey is. You are NOT the self-appointed czar here. If you have a problem with my conduct you may take it up with the mod.

Once again I will not apologize for an argument that I did not start.

Rather than deal with the two of you tag-teaming me, I'd rather be replaced. But if you think you can

STOP BEATING A DEAD FUCKING HORSE

then I'll

@Mod: Withdraw my request for a replacement

[hohum]

there's no reason for this discussion to be taking place at all, much less over 2 pages.

[hohum]

We're assuming that roffman isn't lying about receiving the communiqué. If we were't able to figure out who sent it by making everyone bur their communiqué how likely are these two scenarios compared to one or the other:

1) Scum got lucky and town picked them back-to-back so they were able to deceive us
2) roffman lied about receiving the PM to further his case against me to score an easy lynch.

I think in context #2 is an easier pill to swallow, especially since he's now trying to defend himself preemptively. Please note that his vote on me started as a random vote, and he has kept it on me the entire time.

[hohum]

bur=burn

[hohum]

Yeah, what magicrabbit said. I misunderstood what juls was asking before. I received one message before the plan was proposed, one after. When I said I received 2 before the plan was proposed, I think I was utilising a mental shortcut to write down a mistake. I can't accurately say why I said it that way.

I don't know what to say to this besides "wow."

Vote: roffman

[hohum]

I was making the request of Reecer, though I see how you might think I was asking you to do it.

Reecer, sum up your thoughts on Roffman please.

Reecer's attempts to coast through this game is earning scum points in my log book. Almost to the point that I don't really care what he has to say about Roffman. Roffman is still going to be a good choice for lynch regardless of how Reecer chimes in.

If reecer were smart he'd throw Roffman under the bus right now. He doesn't know what to say or do because his scum buddy is caught.

Let him keep busy posting if he wants to, because if roffman is scum we can afford to mislynch, and a reecer replacement might stop dropping scum tells.

[hohum]

I am not through being suspicious of roffman yet but my suspicions of hohum just grew a lot. I think a re-read is in order.

I don't see anything wrong with policy lynches. They happen regularly on MS. The mod obviously isn't going to force-replace him and he's going to continue posting busy posts. There's a good reasons to lynch lurkers:

1) It discourages the behavior. If you're the victim of a policy lynch because of certain behavior, you would stop that behavior; now wouldn't you?

2) If we didn't occasionally lynch lurkers it would set a precedent that all scum needs to do to stay off the radar is not post.

3) We're going to tie ourselves up into WIFOMy knots trying to figure out whether we should lynch him or not.

These are all also reasons why lurking is a scum tell, and why the longer it goes on the bigger of a scum tell it actually is.

I'm not advocating a policy lynch in place of a roffman lynch. I think we should always opt for the better lynch targets. When we run out of possible lynch targets, then policy lynches will usually turn up scum.

[hohum]

I'm mostly saying all of this in hopes that he will see that he could potentially be a victim in absentee and start actively scum hunting.

[hohum]

shit, wrong game

Fixed it for you

[hohum]

uh, ignore that last post please.

[hohum]

thanks mod

[hohum]

Now you are contradicting yourself hohum...you are saying now that you think Reecer is a policy lynch. In post 260 you were advocating his lynch based on scumminess.

You don't know what you're talking about. It would be a policy lynch at this point because he's not dropping scum tells. But he's not DOING anything so it isn't like we're going to get tells out of him.

If you lynch someone for 1 reason and 1 reason only, it boils down to a policy lynch. The action of inaction is still a scum tell.

[hohum]

@Juls: How's that reread going BTW? I was expecting you to do more than simply pick apart my response over petty semantic issues. I expected some form of PBPA from you to support your statement:

my suspicions of hohum just

grew a lot

. I think a re-read is in order.

[hohum]

@Mod

If we do not lynch by deadline, is the current player with the most votes going to get lynched or will it result in a no-lynch?

[hohum]

I just perused through the original communiqué game and no such role existed. I can understand the mods wanting to adjust setups to balance things out a bit but that really sounds like a pretty far-fetched role idea. So I guess I'm saying that I don't believe the claim.

I also think you're over reacting with your "I'm sick of the attitudes" comment and the "Go ahead, lynch me" attitude. Hint: You're not a martyr when people think you're scummy, you're just suicidal.

[hohum]

OK hohum, you have already called one person a bitch in the thread...I don't like that. I really don't enjoy playing in games with people who talk like you or act like you. And Ectomancer is driving the game while others follow him around like a little puppy dog...it's sad really that people can't think on their on.

@BSG: Here is my full communique

Townie postman. I send packages. To town or scum? Answer me discretely in post. Will reveal self later if trust.

Have I been acting up since then? I don't think I have. I've been as polite to you as I could possibly be in this process.

You're digging up drama now because you don't want to deal with the facts anymore.

[hohum]

I didn't say you were trying to cause drama, I said you were trying to dig up old drama instead of addressing the issue at hand. Are you going to revert to the "hohum is an asshole" defense every time I make a decent point? I'm not going to take your flamebait, sorry.

You've also built a case against roffman, but without Ecto's plan (which really morphed into Casey's plan BTW, with input from some other people as well) we wouldn't have been able to expose him -- yet you still claim that he's leading us around.

[hohum]

I tried to discuss your claim with you already. Post 280. You mind addressing that?

The very next post was flamebait. You completely dodged me.

[hohum]

Your reason for not believing me is because this role didn't exist in Communque 1? That's pretty weak. Again...this is a confirmable role...what is your reason for not believing me?

I was fishing for a reaction. Was that so hard? Half the conversation on this page was completely unnecessary.

You're right, it's a confirmable role, and that's why I want you to continue to participate in this game. I'd like to hear your ideas about how you plan to confirm your role.

Also, how do you plan to confirm

alignment

. Scum get power roles occasionally too. As you pointed out, your "packages" could potentially contain bad things, instead of good things.

While we're on the subject, why did you claim at all? I read back a few pages and I don't recall seeing anyone pushing for your claim. What I saw instead was a little bit of pressure from ecto and the mention of a possible future lynch (and if you've payed attention to many games at all you should realize that lining up lynches is a bad thing to do, not a good thing, but I digress). If you're telling the truth, you may have made matters worse by potentially depriving the town of a useful tool.

[hohum]

There are three problems with what you say Budja.

First, I am not certain those things I mention are in my packages...that is speculation. Second, by targetting someone I think to be scum...

if that person IS scum I am relying on mafia to verify my role.

That is not a promising scenario. Third, I asked the moderator if I would get any sort of information about what I sent after I sent it and he told me I would not. So that means I have to rely on who got the package to tell me what they got.

The bolded part is a fallacy. What Budja is saying is if there's a chance that your packages contain anything harmful, you should try and target mafia first. If you end up scoring a NK by way of Vig, then it would be pretty obvious that you did it. The only issue at that point is another townie with a vig-like power role counterclaiming you and I doubt that's going to happen.

If your packages contain things that might be helpful to the town if they were given to pro-town players, you would know that by D3 and be able to act accordingly, again though confirming your role but this time by a pro-town player

If by D3 you haven't confirmed your role, it's pretty safe to say that you're confirmed scum.

I'm willing to wait 2 more days to confirm whether you're scum or not, provided you continue to contribute to the game and don't just give up like you've been saying.

[hohum]

Ectomancer, you are gaming the mod, or coming dangerously close to it. That's a bad thing to do. Stop it.

I don't think using the previous game as a predictor for what might happen this game is a bad thing, but I fail to see what Ecto is getting at and why he unvoted Roffman. I'd like him to clarify his sudden disinterest in a Roffman lynch, and why he's now advocating a night action on someone who is likely to be replaced soon (go look at the replacement thread, the mod is actively searching)

There are some useful tidbits of information in there that go a long way towards backing up Juls' claim though, such as:

* Glork (Townsperson) is given the ability to send an extra message.

[hohum]

EBWOP: We also have to take things with a grain of salt. As always YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary)

[hohum]

You know ecto, it isn't like we simulposted or anything. You could have taken a few minutes to address my question.

[hohum]

Here, you see how this works? Juls posted, then Casey, and hey! There you are 3rd in line!

I would prefer if you stopped talking to me like a child, or next time you lecture me about insulting or pissing someone off I'm going to laugh in your fucking face.

Ectomancer, you are gaming the mod, or coming dangerously close to it. That's a bad thing to do. Stop it.

I don't think using the previous game as a predictor for what might happen this game is a bad thing, but I fail to see what Ecto is getting at and why he unvoted Roffman. I'd like him to clarify his sudden disinterest in a Roffman lynch, and why he's now advocating a night action on someone who is likely to be replaced soon (go look at the replacement thread, the mod is actively searching)

There are some useful tidbits of information in there that go a long way towards backing up Juls' claim though, such as:

* Glork (Townsperson) is given the ability to send an extra message.

Duhrr.

Again, there's no need to be jackassy about being questioned.

You just answered your own question with your last quote.

You also suspiciously mis-characterize my unvote as "a disinterest in a Roffman lynch".

Here's what you do.

If you are no longer certain of your case, you unvote.

Plain and simple. You look at everything again with the new information and either press on again with a vote, or you explain why it is no longer viable after you've looked at it.

Do you see the contradiction there? How could I be mis-characterizing your unvote if you're no longer sure about your case? "I'm no longer sure about my case" sure does sound like disinterest to me -- because why would you be interested in lynching someone that you're unsure of?

You waffle too much. So far (and we're not even through with D1 yet) you've been SURE that I'm scum, you've been SURE that Juls is scum and you've been SURE that Roffman is scum. Now you're backing down, and demanding that we investigate someone who isn't even here to defend himself (I like how you dodged me on that one, BTW)

I don't play according to your clock FYI.

Once again, stop being a complete dick about me probing you for information. I've said nothing to you to deserve that sort of backlash.

[hohum]

Oh yeah, what does a player being replaced have to do with whether they are shadowed or not? We still have that role in our game.
Would you proceed with a lynch on anyone with an absent player in the game?

I wouldn't lynch him today, and I certainly wouldn't waste the use of a power role on someone who isn't here to submit a night action.

[hohum]

@Mod: Thanks for the clarification. Would you entertain the possibility of a second extension if the town were able to reach a majority consensus?

@Ecto

You never actually answered my question. Why the shaken confidence so suddenly in your case on Roffman? You unvoted him without stating a reason why -- and you attempted to mask that fact by trying to dragging dvoraan into this.

5 days away from an already extended deadline is not a good time to find out that one of the principle conductors of a wagon is suddenly nervous about a lynch.

I'm all for calm and rational discussion. The more we talk about this as a group the more likely we are to get it right; however, you must be aware that 5 days is not a lot of time with which to tear a wagon apart and completely refocus the town, right? Especially since 2 of those days fall on a weekend. Weekends are typically the period on MS with the lowest activity level so in reality we only have 3 solid days with which to reach a consensus here.

If it came down to it, would you support a no-lynch opposed to a Roffman lynch? If so, why? This is an important question because it is likely going to be the scenario which will play out here unless you can provide us with a better lynch target in short order or go do a reread on roffman.

[hohum]

The deadline is the 25th currently. We could extend that out by a week by reaching a consensus of requests towards the mod. Not a bad idea because someone here is trying very hard to derail us.

I don't want to lynch anyone at this point unless we have either A: a one shot cop claim, or B: a 2nd communique claim that did not go to Roffman.
We really need to know when a potential deadline is, because within a certain of period of time of that I am going to give up on either claim appearing and consider both Roffman and Hohum to be town.

A no lynch is a horrible idea. I don't like it.

[hohum]

THERE ARE ONLY A FEW SITUATIONS WHERE NO-LYNCH IS A GOOD IDEA and none of those situations apply on D1.

Big HoS

on Ectomancer, any anyone else supportive of the idea of a no-lynch.

[hohum]

Point taken. I did ask you point blank at one point whether or not you supported a no-lynch and never received a satisfactory answer from you. Part of my melodrama was designed to pry that answer from you. Thanks. I'm glad we're on the same page now.

You're posting walls of text instead of answering direct questions, and you're setting a precedent that you only respond to people when being pressured to do so.

[hohum]

Once again, we need someone to come forward and state they had/have a 2nd communique, dont need to reveal a thing about it except that you didn't send it to Roffman.
If someone had the 1 shop cop investigation, please claim it to give us the additional information surrounding Hohum that we need.
Should neither of these materialize, I will not support a lynch of either one of them unless future revelations concerning the events of today cause the case to be revisited. Otherwise I will consider

both

cases closed.

I want you to look at the wording of this and think about it VERY carefully:

* Glork (Townsperson) is given the ability to send an extra message.

Glork had to be "given" the ability to send an extra PM. The gift had to have come from somewhere.

It may be true that we don't totally understand the mechanics of the game yet, based on the way games with special mechanics are typically run I doubt the moderator would just arbitrarily bestow such a gift on someone. It had to have come from someone with a power role.

Since there was NO night action (day start), I still believe Roffman is lying. I also believe the gift of a second communique is going to need to come from Juls.

[hohum]

You're posting walls of text instead of answering direct questions, and you're setting a precedent that you only respond to people when being pressured to do so.

You have really got to be kidding me on this one. I just spent hours brainstorming on every conceivable possibility and the probabilities of what could have happened, put them together along with a plan of action and I only respond to people when being pressured? I conceived the entire idea of verification of votes, etc, etc, what to do with the results we found from that, etc. Often while composing posts, people would pose

more

questions of me, and for the most part those questions were being answered in those "walls of text". When that covers things, I'm not going to send in personalized replies on stationary for them, and I'm not going back to quote each and every question during the section of my posts where I'm addressing their points.

Really, this statement comes to me as if from an entirely different planet. If someone has a direct question

that wasn't already answered in the novel I spent the last 2 days writing

, then feel free to recycle it. Just don't get irritated when I quote what I already wrote.

How about looking @ 349 instead of whining?

[hohum]

Not sure where 349 has anything to do with responding only to pressure...

You misinterpreted what I was trying to say to you. Let me try again:

stop whining

Because you DIDN'T answer my question about no-lynch. I even went out of my way to stress how important it was for you to answer that question and you still ignored it.

If your next response is going to be "well go back and reread the text mountain I've posted in the last couple of days" then you should know I have been reading what you're saying. If it's in there I missed it because you weren't being direct enough. You rather chose to be evasive and answer me in a round about way. Tsk Tsk.

[hohum]

You can get your point across in far fewer words and avoid looking scummy in the process.

[hohum]

yay, we can relax a little now.

[hohum]

So basically you come into a game where the rules are significantly more complex and the game structure is completely different from what your used to and you decide, with no actual logical reasoning, to ignore valid points about scum hunting and how to go around determining information. No offense, but get off your high horse and learn to at least accept other people know what their doing. Your refusal to embrace new concepts and develop alternate scum hunting tactics reeks of scum trying to lock the town onto a course that creates a series of lynches based on misinformation and mathematical probabilities. If it's not a scum tactic, it's self destructive town tactic.

unvote, vote casey

You think bullying her is going to make you seem less scummy? Nice try, roffscum.

[hohum]

WTF with the OMGUS, BTW. Noted in my logbook.

[hohum]

It's not an OMGUS

. That is the first time I've actually made an informed vote. As for bullying her, it might make her accept that other points of view are equally valid, and actual scum hunting might ensure besides "crossing fingers".

Now you're either ignorant or just not telling the truth. You didn't make the vote until after she reenforced her own reason for voting.

The mention of her previous experience with this game in a group setting with her friends is entirely anecdotal. I don't see how you could have possibly picked up a scum tell from that considering YOU don't know anything more about this particular set up than she does or anyone else playing in this game does. This is only the second time this setup has ever been run on MS.

Considering you couldn't possibly have picked up a scum tell from that, it's an OMGUS in every classic definition of the term.

Confirm Vote: roffman

Can we please lynch this scum now? KTHNXBYE!

[hohum]

Not sure where 349 has anything to do with responding only to pressure...

You misinterpreted what I was trying to say to you. Let me try again:

stop whining

You really don't want to continue down this route.

No, no no lynch. Got it? Good. You invented that in your own mind.

I'm not the one keeping this discussion going you are. Plenty of important stuff has been said since that post. I really wish you'd learn to read a thread all the way to the bottom before you compose your replies. There's plenty of tools available on your computer to assist with such a task: Notepad being the obvious one.

But, if you REALLY want to continue to nitpick me (you're so insistent, so I must oblige)

You just used a triple negative

"no no no lynch"

which roughly translates to [no] (single) [no] (double, meaning yes) no-lynch.

I believe your intentions are clear. You are not supportive of a no-lynch. I'm merely trying to point out the absurdity with which you're about to embark.

[hohum]

Not sure where 349 has anything to do with responding only to pressure...

You misinterpreted what I was trying to say to you. Let me try again:

stop whining

You really don't want to continue down this route.

No, no no lynch. Got it? Good. You invented that in your own mind.

I'm not the one keeping this discussion going you are. Plenty of important stuff has been said since that post. I really wish you'd learn to read a thread all the way to the bottom before you compose your replies. There's plenty of tools available on your computer to assist with such a task: Notepad being the obvious one.

But, if you REALLY want to continue to nitpick me (you're so insistent, so I must oblige)

You just used a triple negative

"no no no lynch"

which roughly translates to [no] (single) [no] (double, meaning yes) no-lynch.

I believe your intentions are clear. You are not supportive of a no-lynch. I'm merely trying to point out the absurdity with which you're about to embark.

You play as you like, I'll play as I do. I go through the posts, read it, and answer it. I don't

need

to see what was said after that post. Scum might (whoops! need to edit that after that was said haha!), but I certainly don't. I could care less if you like the style I use or not.

It's not a style thing, it's a courtesy thing. I'm guilty of multiposting too but when you jump from subject to subject like that, and are replying to points which have been rendered moot it interrupts the natural flow of the conversation and it makes you seem as if you're purposefully trying to derail us.

You wouldn't do it in a normal face-to-face conversation so don't do it here.

[hohum]

This isn't a normal conversation. Go to meatworld if you want one. You just happen to be on as often as I do, so when you see me doing a string of posts, you might wait. You wouldn't interrupt someone in real life, so don't do it here. Stylistically, it is far easier for people to respond to my posts when broken into separate topics. You'll just have to live with it.

Could you possibly be any more pretentious?

[hohum]

I could try really hard for you Perhaps you lack a sarcasm detector Mr. Kettle.

fag

[hohum]

I'll apologize in advance. Bit uncalled for. I apparently need a nap quite badly.

[hohum]

I'm sorry but the math just DOESN'T add up for a no-lynch on D1. A mis lynch would be better.

Think about it, very VERY carefully. A no lynch isn't going to net us any MORE information than a lynch will, and we'll be in better shape. If we do actually hit scum (and we won't find out until end game anyways) the odds of us lynching correctly tomorrow become worse but it won't matter because we've extended out the game.

There were 3 scum alive last game so I think it's reasonable to assume that they haven't added a 4th as it would likely shorten the game in a no-reveal scenario (think, scum guiding the process, which is also why I hate what ecto is doing to the town)

Incidentally I wouldn't be opposed to a don_johnson lynch now over a roffman lynch for even proposing such a stupid idea.

FoS: don_johnson

Do I really need to remind everyone that there exists NO situation regardless of the mechanics of the game where no-lynch is a good idea on D1.

The (rough) Math:

If we no lynch:

* Assuming 10 town, 2 scum:

1:5 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose a townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 all things being equal 1:4.5

* Assuming 9 town, 3 scum:

1:3 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose a townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:2.5

* Assuming 8 town, 4 scum:

1:2 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose a townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:1.5

If we do lynch today, and we mislynch:

* Assuming 10 town, 2 scum:

1:5 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose 2 townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:4 (better than no-lynch)

* Assuming 9 town, 3 scum:

1:3 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose 2 townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:1.5 (better than no-lynch)

* Assuming 8 town, 4 scum:

1:2 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose 2 townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become damn near 1:1 (although we'll be in lylo too)

[hohum]

*headdesk*

[hohum]

I have never gotten a communique other than the password one.

You know, you REALLY need to start contributing more. Your saving grace is that LAL (lynch all liars) is a better policy lynch (in that it nets more scum) than LAL (lynch all lurkers)

[hohum]

actually I just realized that both contract to the same acronym. Point still stands.

[hohum]

To sum up, it looks like good reasoning except for the 2 I mentioned above. I think leaving Dorvaan and Houseofcards is reasonable.

que? what? are you saying leave dorvan/dj and houseofcards on the list of suspects who sent the "phantom" communique?

are you saying you agree with the no lynch idea?

Wow. Stretch much?

I absolutely agree.. We should leave them in the list of suspects. Reecer6 as well. They've hardly contributed.

+points DJ

[hohum]

Ecto,

Dorvaan has been replaced, and don_johnson is his replacement. He's actively contributing. I'm not saying lynch him today unless he does something REALLY scummy but since he's actually active now he should definitely be accruing scum points for the tells he drops.

[hohum]

Which part of my statement is the fallacy? Certainly not the "we'll be in better shape" part, because that's ABSOLUTELY true. There's hard math to back that up too.

[hohum]

I can't believe anyone is seriously considering a no lynch.

[hohum]

@Cybele: Welcome to the game.

Your point about not following people around blindly in this game is severely understated.

This is a no-reveal game. Which means we still gain information during a lynch but not after (because we don't see the flip. This work's to the town's disadvantage if the scum team turns out to be the principles involved in pushing these wagons. We're completely blind to scum tactics that involve aggressive grandstanding.

Ecto likes to talk about how he believes he is helping the town, and how he is such a strong leader. I would submit to the rest of the group that this sort of diluted self-aggrandizing attitude is very harmful to the town in a no reveal game.

Further, his attitude at the beginning of the game sucked, hard. He did several things that I do not approve of:

First, he jumped all over me for a joke vote.

Second, he tried like hell to throw shit on anyone who opposed his communique plan, even if that opposition stemmed from something as simple as a lack of understanding of the mechanics of the game.

Third, he burned about 15 days of original deadline putting this plan into action. He also backed off of his vote at a very critical time where we needed a lynch target and started to tear down the Roffman wagon. The deadline has since been repealed, but he had no way to know that the mod was going to do that.

Fourth, he stalls (see previous point) and waffles. For example I have gone on his radar from being confirmed scum, to being "nearly" confirmed town, back to leaning scum as of the last time he gave an opinion on my game play.

Fifth: He was drawing conclusions about people's alignment VERY early in the game

Sixth, he likes to preach about ad-hom attacks, yet he dinged me 3 times in one post. Hypocrisy is very telling.

Seventh, he's been attacking people that I'm getting mostly town reads from. Juls for instance. Even after the discussion ensued about how she could verify her claim he was still advocating her lynch -- granted no longer in such an immediate fashion. This shows that he really doesn't seem to care who gets lynched and why.

I like a roffman lynch; however, I'm becoming increasingly concerned about Ectomancer.

As such

Unvote

Vote: Ectomancer

Also, I'm still vehemently opposed to a no-lynch. And I'm not ignoring the dynamics of the game any more than you're ignoring the hard math behind why in every single MS game to date regardless of mechanics a no lynch on D1 has or would have harmed the town (even if marginally) more than it would have helped the town. A D1 no lynch in ANY situation flies in the face of years of experience and general accepted practice on this site.

Anyone pushing for a D1 no-lynch should be lynched on policy.

[hohum]

Eagerness to lynch =\= in a rushing to lynch. I think the discussion is going in the right direction. Also I'm not the only one opposed to a no-lynch.

Also there's nothing to back up your notion that I'd be willing to lynch anyone, as (besides my random vote) I've only changed my vote once all day from roffman to ecto, and I laid out some pretty compelling reasons to do so. Are you saying that my justification for voting ecto is complete crap? If so, why?

[hohum]

Hohum, on 1, He thought your vote was real, as you have evidence. When I look back on that, I see how idiotic that was. But on everything else, I agree.
Also, everyone, post all the communiques you got so far, not counting password. I got none.

So you ARE actually paying attention to the game. Why aren't you contributing to it? Why are you hiding behind my analysis? Don't you have any opinions by now?

[hohum]

I AM PUSHING FOR A NO LYNCH UNLESS WE CAN BE REASONABLY CERTAIN WE ARE GOING TO HIT SCUM.

The problem with this is as sure as you are that we're never going to gain any information from a lynch (which is a fallacy, because wagons are a great source of information) because this game is no-reveal, we're never going to be 100% sure that we're lynching scum either. This game is all about subtleties and grey area.

Because we can't get any information out of a flip and examine wagons in retrospect, it makes the mathematical probabilities all that more important.

The special mechanics of the game do not and should not effect the way we should be lynching. No reveal isn't all that special of a mechanic. No reveal games are run on this site all the time. The communiqué mechanic of this game remains completely unaffected whether we decide to no-lynch or not.

[hohum]

Oh I can cite plenty of examples of your scummy behavior as documented in my post above.

Don't think for a second that just because some of your stall tactics have yielded positive results means you're off the hook for the scum tells.

[hohum]

Oh I can cite plenty of examples of your scummy behavior as documented in my post above.

Don't think for a second that just because some of your stall tactics have yielded positive results means you're off the hook for the scum tells.

And what you'll end up with is showing, or

not

showing is that I'm not so great as I think I am. I'm quite pleased with what I've accomplished myself. As for the stalling, it was pointed out some time ago that in order to get a deadline was to ask. Every time I or someone else asked for an extension it was granted.
On waffling back and forth, I call that weighing new evidence and continuing to brainstorm on the possibilities that exist for the known givens in the situation. I do not possess the certainty that would allow me an unerring path.

I'll post a PBPA if necessary. I think PBPAs are mostly useless as opinions usually suffice. As you indicated what you have said and done is already on record for people to see. IF the rest of the town isn't on the same page as I am then I will post a full PBPA. Until then, I will do nothing more than solicit comments from the rest of the group.

PBPAs allow the target the benefit of misdirection. I'm not going to sit here and argue with you unnecessarily because protracted arguments quite effectively distract everybody. For once everyone else is going to be given a chance to comment before you're allowed to completely take over and steer this process again.

[hohum]

I think PBPAs are mostly useless as opinions usually suffice.

The problem with relying on opinion, is everyone has one. A PBPA shows clear and concrete examples of tactics used by a person with which to support your attack against them. I'm not saying you should analyze every post, but some quotes from key posts with which to reinforce your arguments would go a long way to supporting your case on ectomancer, and stop you sounding as if your complaining because the most pro-active player is targeting you.

Thanks for not quoting the relevant parts of what I was attempting to say. +scum points for taking my quotes out of context. +scum points for blatant defending.

The point was I'm trying to avoid an argument with ectomancer until OTHERS have a chance to comment. I never objected to posting the PBPA, which I already have prepared.

[hohum]

Ecto,

I don't see how we're going to be able to exploit the game's mechanics for the rest of the day to garner any more information now that everyone has burned their communiques and nobody is coming forward with the com claim, so I'll tell you what: You go right ahead and continue to tie yourself up into WIOFMy knots trying to figure out how, and I'll sit here and do some actual scum hunting.

The special mechanic is gone for the day. We need to start treating the rest of the day just like any other day in a no-reveal game.

You can sit there and whine about me all you want, I don't give a shit. I'm going to continue to try and get your pretentious ass lynched as long as I feel that I have a solid case against you.

[hohum]

Re my last post, corn claim == cop claim. I don't know how I managed to make that typo.

[hohum]

You have yet to support your idea that lynching anyone at all is better than a no lynch.

You're a complete moron. I posted exactly that. Not my fault that you and don_johnson are dismissing simple math and years of accepted practice and general wisdom of never no-lynching on D1 as gained through many YEARS of experience running games on this site. Anyone who even has a basic clue of how these setups work will tell you that a D1 no lynch is a bad fucking idea.

I'm sorry but the math just DOESN'T add up for a no-lynch on D1. A mis lynch would be better.

Think about it, very VERY carefully. A no lynch isn't going to net us any MORE information than a lynch will, and we'll be in better shape. If we do actually hit scum (and we won't find out until end game anyways) the odds of us lynching correctly tomorrow become worse but it won't matter because we've extended out the game.

There were 3 scum alive last game so I think it's reasonable to assume that they haven't added a 4th as it would likely shorten the game in a no-reveal scenario (think, scum guiding the process, which is also why I hate what ecto is doing to the town)

Incidentally I wouldn't be opposed to a don_johnson lynch now over a roffman lynch for even proposing such a stupid idea.

FoS: don_johnson

Do I really need to remind everyone that there exists NO situation regardless of the mechanics of the game where no-lynch is a good idea on D1.

The (rough) Math:

If we no lynch:

* Assuming 10 town, 2 scum:

1:5 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose a townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 all things being equal 1:4.5

* Assuming 9 town, 3 scum:

1:3 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose a townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:2.5

* Assuming 8 town, 4 scum:

1:2 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose a townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:1.5

If we do lynch today, and we mislynch:

* Assuming 10 town, 2 scum:

1:5 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose 2 townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:4 (better than no-lynch)

* Assuming 9 town, 3 scum:

1:3 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose 2 townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become 1:1.5 (better than no-lynch)

* Assuming 8 town, 4 scum:

1:2 chance of hitting scum on D1
Lose 2 townie, the odds of hitting scum on D2 become damn near 1:1 (although we'll be in lylo too)

[hohum]

Really? You honestly want to tell us that a point by point analysis of facts and actual words is practically useless and opinions are of much more value? Am I also reading that so long as enough people are willing to follow your emotional appeal, there is no need to actually post your case? How does that help us?

Here, much like roffman you're twisting my words to mean whatever you want them to mean.

I think PBPAs are mostly useless as opinions usually suffice.

The problem with relying on opinion, is everyone has one. A PBPA shows clear and concrete examples of tactics used by a person with which to support your attack against them. I'm not saying you should analyze every post, but some quotes from key posts with which to reinforce your arguments would go a long way to supporting your case on ectomancer, and stop you sounding as if your complaining because the most pro-active player is targeting you.

Thanks for not quoting the relevant parts of what I was attempting to say. +scum points for taking my quotes out of context. +scum points for blatant defending.

The point was I'm trying to avoid an argument with ectomancer until OTHERS have a chance to comment. I never objected to posting the PBPA, which I already have prepared.

[hohum]

The point was I'm trying to avoid an argument with ectomancer until OTHERS have a chance to comment.

I never objected to posting the PBPA, which I already have prepared.

[hohum]

Also, I'm still vehemently opposed to a no-lynch. And I'm not ignoring the dynamics of the game any more than you're ignoring the hard math behind why in every single MS game to date regardless of mechanics a no lynch on D1 has or would have harmed the town (even if marginally) more than it would have helped the town. A D1 no lynch in ANY situation flies in the face of years of experience and general accepted practice on this site.

[hohum]

Re: 475 I also further clarified my position on the no-lynch wagon, so you saying I haven't addressed that is total horse shit and you're pulling it out of your ass.

[hohum]

@Juls: thanks for doing the work and pulling up those metas on the active players during the communique window. It's very helpful. And HUZZAH to Ecto being replaced!

[hohum]

I'm definitely not opposed to a reecer lynch either.

Unvote

but I've still GMEO ecto's replacement

Vote: Reecer6

[hohum]

Unvote

I'm still happy with no lynch due to the mechanics of the game, but i'm going to wait for flameaxe to post before i make a final decision

The mechanics of this game have little bearing on whether or not no-lynch is a viable strategy for D1 (hint: it NEVER is)

i understand what you think, but i do not plan to push a "no lynch" agenda past day 1 without due cause. i just don't think it would be a bad way to start this game of "no reveal". but, whatever. i am interested to get some commentary from the replacements.

Please show me a game where no-lynch was a viable strategy in a no-reveal game. Should be an easy task for you to do considering there are no-reveal games run on MS on a regular basis.

no-lynch is never a viable D1 strategy. It could certainly become a viable strategy later on down the road, but that's based largely on game mechanics. If it is a viable strategy because of game mechanics (which won't change) on D1, why not any other day?

Vote: don_johnson

I'm sick of this discussion taking place, and I'm tired of you pushing this horrible idea on the rest of us.

[hohum]

i am not pushing this idea on the rest of you. also, i don't know how to "prove" it a viable strategy. it just makes sense to me. scum kills a townie night 1. we start the game on day 2 with a "confirmed townie". we can then analyze the interactions of said townie with other players from day1 much like we would analyze a "townie bandwagon" in a regular reveal game. its not much, but it is a slight advantage.

if we lynch someone and they are not revealed, we really don't have as much to analyze. also, it may be a viable late game strategy as well if we don't figure this out. sorry, but i've never been in a "no-reveal" game before.

your vote is interesting, though. what is scummy about suggesting an idea and sticking to it? also, can you cite examples of what you are describing as me "pushing" this idea? so out of all day 1 you think i am scummiest for suggesting a no-lynch? scummier than the others who are agreeing with me? what exactly sets me apart to garner your vote?

We'd have a confirmed townie anyways, regardless of whether we no-lynch or not. The odds are better in our favor tomorrow if we lynch. It doesn't change the fact that the NK produces a confirmed townie.

Your idea holds about as much merit as a wet paper bag holds water so to continue pushing it is indeed scummy.

[hohum]

it's either ecto or don_johnson which need to go at this point. I'll post more on ecto (including the PBPA) once his replacement comes, so that it doesn't get lost in the conversation beforehand.

[hohum]

So hohum, I take it you no longer suspect roffman? Interesting.

Where did you see me say that? Please quote! Because I never did!

[hohum]

it's either ecto or don_johnson which need to go at this point.

Why one of these two and not roffman?

because everyone fell off of the roffman wagon. If you want to start piling votes back on Roffman I'm game. I'm not going to sit here and push something on deaf ears like don johnson appears to be doing.

DJ is third in line on my suspect list, BTW, so he's third in line for my scrutiny.

do some actual scum hunting instead of relying diversion tactics, okay?

[hohum]

Again, I never said I wasn't down with a roffman lynch.

Unvote

Vote: Roffman

[hohum]

Unvote, vote Roffman

Will you guys make up your mind?!??! I am getting frustrated with this back and forth.

Blame ecto. We would have had him lynched if he hadn't tried to tear his own roffman wagon down a few days before deadline.

[hohum]

that was quick. anyone got a vote count?

hohum: how did i get to third on your list? please answer the questions i have already asked i.e. what sets me apart from all of the other players who have either voted for or considered a "no lynch"?

you are deflecting.

Vote for your biggest suspect.

i can dig it.

Unvote, Vote Hohum

I didn't you ask it. So I'll answer:

What sets you apart is that you started pushing the idea first, and you're STILL pushing it, even though you're obviously wrong. Your previous supporters aren't even with you any more.

Further, you waited until I switched my vote to Roffman so that I couldn't call you out on the OMGUS vote.

You got to third on my list by pushing for support for an obviously scummy idea, and you're closing the gap quite quickly between yourself and ecto with the OMGUSy responses and the attempt to make me look as if I'm purposefully ignoring your questions by being an ambiguous little turf.

[hohum]

turf = turd

[hohum]

btw: you just suggested lynching a player who is in the process of being replaced. are you afraid of some new commentary?

I didn't suggest lynching ecto or I would have voted for him. Did you not see me say I'm interested in discussing the possibility once his replacement joins?

[hohum]

don,

You're only half quoting what I said. It is scummy to take quotes out of context. Here's the rest of the quote for clarity sake. I'll bold the relevant part which shows I'm willing to wait on an ecto lynch until he is replaced which is the part you conveniently left out:

it's either ecto or don_johnson which need to go at this point.

I'll post more on ecto (including the PBPA) once his replacement comes, so that it doesn't get lost in the conversation beforehand.

again: HOW AM I BEING AMBIGUOUS?

Fair enough, I just didn't SEE your question.

[hohum]

sorry, it wasn't "conveniently" left out. i snipped the quote because i was simply pointing out that you did in fact suggest an ecto lynch.

if you don't want to lynch before the replacements get here then perhaps you should unvote roffman. casey just put him at L-1.

we have been waiting for you to produce this pbpa forquite some time. you said it was already prepared. please post it now. if you feel it gets lost in the thread then you should be able to just paste it in again.

has roffman claimed?

Why would I unvote roffman? Roffman is HERE and in no danger of being replaced. I already said I'll produce the PBPA when Ecto's replacement joins the game.

Why are you trying SO HARD to derail the pending roffman lynch?

@Roffman: Please claim now.

[hohum]

A) I'm not going to start railing on someone who is

NOT HERE TO DEFEND HIM OR HERSELF

so you can fucking wait for an Ecto PBPA. Period. If you don't like this then go sulk in a corner. incidentally even after I post it, and we discuss it I'm likely to vote you next,
because you're just so blatantly scum right now that it isn't funny.

B) Claiming at L-1 is protocol or L-2 makes no difference. If someone really wants to drop an obvious scum tell by hammering him early, then I welcome that, because it will out scum.

[hohum]

A) I'm not going to start railing on someone who is

NOT HERE TO DEFEND HIM OR HERSELF

so you can fucking wait for an Ecto PBPA. Period. If you don't like this then go sulk in a corner. incidentally even after I post it, and we discuss it I'm likely to vote you next,
because you're just so blatantly scum right now that it isn't funny.

B) Claiming at L-1 is protocol or L-2 makes no difference. If someone really wants to drop an obvious scum tell by hammering him early, then I welcome that, because it will out scum.

[hohum]

Your lack of pack mentality is disturbing, dj. Please tell me why you think Roffman is not scum, because you're obviously not voting for him and trying very hard to derail his wagon.

[hohum]

sorry for the multipost

[hohum]

roff may very well be scum. never said he wasn't. also, your ridiculous and unrealistic fears have been noted. i am not jumping in for the pack mentality. if you were town, i don't see any reason for you to not post this "alleged" pbpa.

therefore: you are scum. scummier than anyone thus far. i am voting you and would rather lynch you than anyone here.

also, townies hammer for any number of reasons, it is not always a scumtell for someone to hammer.

mostly when townies quick hammer it's a newbie mistake. I think were all experienced enough here to know better. Also know that it's been said and it is out there it isn't likely to happen. So shut up already.

[hohum]

why are you such a dick?

Why do you think you know everything?

[hohum]

There most certainly is a pro town reason for be to continue withholding the PBPA, and it's because Ecto's replacement is not here to argue back at me. Are you planning on arguing in his defense? I think everyone here would agree that it's best to have the person who is being targeted for whatever reason actually present IN THE GAME. That's why I'm not posting the PBPA, that's why I jumped ship from Ecto to Roffman. You're not getting the PBPA out of me until he is replaced, period, end of story. That way he gets a chance to ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSION WHICH WILL ENSUE.

Seriously. You're giving me a headache. Go swallow some razor blades or something.

[hohum]

i promise not to argue. i want to know if you are lieing. by witholding this information you leave me no choice but to assume you are not telling the truth.

what makes you think that ecto's replacement won't get a chance to participate when they get here? you can always repost this "supposed" pbpa you have ready to go.

Having to repost things and rehash discussion is distracting. I'm not doing it. I don't care how much you sit there and hold your breath, and say I'm scum, or a liar for it.

[hohum]

Holy jesus are you reaching or WHAT!?

[hohum]

I saw it, naturally I don't believe your claim.

[hohum]

Vote: don_johnson

For his incredibly jackassy behavior yesterday. I don't have time to get into more details at the moment. I will though, TODAY (as in calendar day), along with everything else I've been promising.

[hohum]

^^
obvscum.