Mini 742 Monopoly Mafia - Game Over!

[Zilla]

Heya, I read up on quite a bit, but give me a bit to finish up.

[Zilla]

I'm surprised Charter flipped town.

I'm debating on whether we should examine his wagon, or examine the people calling to examine his wagon. I'm leaning more toward the latter, I think Charter's lynch was mostly town led and scum are trying to capitalize on that.

If we're going the other route and examining the wagon, I'm suspicious how how Megatheory's vote carried all the way from RVS to lynch, even though his vote wasn't all that random.

[Zilla]

I don't like how AJ just switched his reasons for voting Nightfall...

I think I may have to read over this game one more time. I also don't like the latest turns discussion has taken.

[Zilla]

so did you not see his post earlier ac? or were you just trying to pressure him into more analysis?

Again, he had only made one large, non-joke post at the time of my voting him, which was mostly a list of possible role names. So kinda, although I'm willing to go back to voting him if he starts posting non-contribution posts again.
Also, why don't you post some analysis, Alabaska?

speaking of not posting a lot of analysis, you've posted shockingly little yourself. one post on how you thought grimmy was scummy and then you take it back immediately after one post defending himself. grimmy was hardly the biggest offender. if you were gonna go after people for not contributing, we have people who don't even seem to post anymore. i'm finding you fairly hypocritical right now.

Irony. AJ hasn't posted analysis himself, very little at all. Almost all his posts are one-line peanut-gallery comments.

Vote: AlabaskaJ

I'd like you to post some analysis' of your own, and perhaps a summary of your stance on players.

[Zilla]

Jebus, I don't really like your format, and I agree with your assessment that AJ needs to contribute more. What happened to your promise on reading up on a few others later?

[Zilla]

What's the reason for the change in vote?

[Zilla]

On what grounds do I qualify as "not scummy?"

[Zilla]

How so?

^ Seconded.

[Zilla]

I'm reluctant to vote charter just yet, as I always find him scummy, but I for the most part agree with Megatheory's analysis there.

Perhaps foreknowledge that charter would flip town, and wanting to add fuel to the fire without committing to a vote on him.

[Zilla]

charter, too much wifom. We get into outguessing the mod if we nameclaim. This is friggin monopoly mafia. who the hell knows who will be on what side?

sounds like scum fishing for possible town power based on flavor.

Nitefell already said this, I don't like the borrowed logic...

[Zilla]

Spoilum, that's a pretty shabby case. There's no link to ac1983fan being scum for saying that suspicion on the bandwagon gets us out of RVS.

I'm more concerned about his unverifiable reasons for thinking Nightfall is town, just for being responsive. That's a shaky reason to think anybody is town. Scum can be just as engaging, and, most times, I catch them on being overly defensive. From my read on Nightfall, he hasn't been very pro-town at all, and has contributed little.

By conduct, I'd put Megatheory as being pretty pro-town, though I'm almost mistrustful that he's just being opportunistic, what with his focus on Charter. I'll admit, I totally disagreed with Charter's nameclaiming proposal, and his conduct afterward was VERY scummy, especially his lie about "You guys just lynched a power role" as a soft claim, and his refusal to fully claim afterward (because he lied). However, before that soft-claiming fiasco, there was less reason to think Charter was scum, and I don't like the top of page 4 where Alabaska and Gamma throw their votes on, AJ with no comment at all, Gamma with an unrelated comment about Megatheory and a random "stop following me."

Sadly, Gamma's been replaced. I can't ask if that was a random vote or not.

[Zilla]

*forgot to wrap up on my comment about Megatheory*

Mega was the reason focus was turned on Charter to begin with, since he disagreed with the nameclaiming theory. Honestly, I agree with the assessment that it helps scum more than town, BUT, I think scum gain more from publicly refusing the nameclaim proposal than the negligible power-role information they may gain from the nameclaims.

There is also the chance that all the scum names ARE related, and they didn't want that to nameclaim for that reason. I think that's a longshot though.

[Zilla]

Woah, wrong person. Nightfall actually has contributed a bit, though he does spend most of his time defending rather than analyzing. His big posts are just answers to accusations. They're not exactly pro-town any more than a well-crafted scum defense.

However, he does make some cases. He doesn't advocate them very much though, and that's concerning, especially in early game. He has thrown in some advice, but it seems so soft...

Still, I was thinking of someone else.

[Zilla]

Jebus, that's who I was thinking of. He hasn't contributed much, and I don't like the hypocrisy in calling out Alabaska on it, when they both have about the same level of activity.

[Zilla]

My point is that you guys are debating minutia that is completely inconsequential to his (or anybody's) alignment. At best, it may improve later games by discussing theory, but at worst, it sidetracks us from finding scum. It doesn't matter how we got out of RVS. The point of the matter is that he suspects the bandwagon that formed "randomly." It's a valid thing to express, no matter whether it's part of RVS or not. Your backlash against his claim that that gets real discussion going is pointless.

[Zilla]

I propose we pressure lurkers back into the game, and I'd like to start with the people who haven't contributed much in their posts anyway, hence Alabaska.

[Zilla]

If you want to try to lynch somebody, why aren't you voting Alabaska?

I would be extremely critical of you should Alabaska come up scum...

[Zilla]

How do you disagree? Your reasons have been poorly communicated, IMO.

[Zilla]

At this point in the game (final hours before deadline) we need to TRY to lynch someone cause we have a fair chance of hitting scum just as much as we do of lynching a townie.

I don't understand how your fear of being hypocritical outweighs this. In fact,

FoS Grimmy

for putting his own image above lynching possible scum.

[Zilla]

vote: Nightfall

that should spur things a bit i think

This is your reason?

FOS Alabaska

[Zilla]

In fact, if you look back at Alabaska, many times he seems to support Nightfall in Nightfall vs Spoilum, and generally disagrees with Spoilum's case.

[Zilla]

^ That's what got me interested in Alabaska in the first place. His original vote seemed like it was just tossed out there, and then he tried justifying it one way, and that was disproven, then he said it was for an entirely different reason. I don't like the way he has switched his reasoning.

[Zilla]

Also I'm Officer Edgar Mallory, a pro-town roleblocker.

...That doesn't make any remote sense first of all.
Second of all, there was no majority against, so today is gonna end with nl.
Third of all, that just doesn't make sense within the game theme of monopoly.

AJ, who did you block?

[Zilla]

I gotta say, the officer being scum fits with the get-out-of-jail-free card being town, flavor-wise.

I want to know who he blocked.

[Zilla]

Vote: Alabaska J

At the very least, more pressure can't hurt.

[Zilla]

.... your sig says "till April 8" and it is now April 9th (almost 10th)

[Zilla]

that's also 3 votes, L -2, just for the record.

[Zilla]

anyway i blocked ac1983fan because if he was scum and had seen my claim (which i threw out there because i thought i would be deadline lynched with the most votes as i got my games confused) because he knew he would be getting rid of a power role for sure.

What does this mean? Without the parenthetical, it reads:

anyway i blocked ac1983fan because if he was scum and had seen my claim... because he knew he would be getting rid of a power role for sure.

I don't see any logic here. Because he saw your claim, if he was scum, "he knew he would be getting rid of a power role for sure." Isn't that true of ANYONE who is scum?

[Zilla]

Mod: prod Ooba, Braeden.

Jebus needs to weigh in.

I'm fine continuing to vote for Alabaska, I'm fine with him at L-2.

[Zilla]

I propose we pressure lurkers back into the game, and I'd like to start with the people who haven't contributed much in their posts anyway, hence Alabaska.

if it is for this reason, then I would be a hypocrite when my work flow outweighs my mafia time and I post rarely.

grimmy
answering (sort of) the zillaquestion.

Who else is not voting and who are our lynch options at this point?

I don't like this: as if the case on Alabaska is just because he's not posting? No. Again, I'm very critical of Grimmy if Alabaska comes up scum.

More pressure perhaps? Alabaska hasn't taken the hint, his latest posts are just "It's too early for a vote on me" OMGUS on Jebus and waiting for his... response. To a poor OMGUS vote.

Case on Alabaska: the way he's doing his summaries makes them very null. They're just as easily opportunistic scum as they are town looking for scum, and his final words on them are unconvincing. There's his vote on Nightfall that went from "This is just to get discussion going" to "I disagree with lurker lynching" to "Those reasons didn't work, so I don't like how you argued with Spoilum"

So, AJ, please post a short writeup of what you think of all the players in the game.

[Zilla]

Alabaska still does not respond to my case, I want to make note.

[Zilla]

Happy Birthday SSK!

I don't like this: as if the case on Alabaska is just because he's not posting? No. Again, I'm very critical of Grimmy if Alabaska comes up scum.

I dont get this part.

I thought the motivation behind the ala votes were the name claim for his go to jail role.

I.E. rather than have a name of a property of a card, he has the full name of the officer in the picture?

To me, it seemed like he went too far with his fake claim, and this is why I found him suspicious enough for voting.

it has nothing to do with the lurker crap

Grimmy
full of lurker crap

You didn't say anything to that effect anywhere before, and you're not voting him. It appears you haven't even considered him as a candidate. Your stated reason that you didn't want to vote him is that "it would be hypocritical" when you had to go off lurking later.

[Zilla]

Though that's also possible that you're waiting to see if bussing is necessary.

Waiting on AJ's promised response. Jebus needs more content.

[Zilla]

Would you like another deadline?

Yes, if it gets people to post...

[Zilla]

The claim of the officer is still suspicious, even though it's a part of the monopoly game. It conflicts with the Get Out Of Jail Free card being protown.

[Zilla]

I disagree with focusing on lurkers just for lurking.

If scum knows their fellow scummates aren't lurkers, they can easily lead mislynches against lurkers. Therefore, in prosecuting lurkers, it should couple their lack of valid response in their posts with actual arguments against them.

AJ hasn't responded adequately, my vote remains.

[Zilla]

I don't like Jebus listing AJ as his top suspect and then unvoting him, and then calling out AC for voting the same person he finds the most scummy.

I also don't like his questions that seem defensive of Alabaska.

[Zilla]

Lastly, I don't like the "pushing a rock up a hill" feel it is to get people to vote at all. Not voting is anti-town. Voting gives us all a trace on people, and forces the scum to vote too, which makes them accountable.

So I highly recommend those who haven't voted to vote someone, with provided reasoning. Even if that reasoning isn't strong, it makes you accountable, and accountability is good for town.

[Zilla]

Also, why am I suddenly obvtown?

[Zilla]

As for having Alabaska at the top of my scumlist but not voting him, I really don't have much more than some scum vibes for anyone I found scummy. I've yet to see anything excessively scummy out of anyone still playing.

These statements are arbitrarily related. That doesn't explain at all why you're not voting him, and in fact only makes it even more questionable. Also, this:

As for the 'it couldn't hurt to leave Alabaska around', I mean that while I do find him scummy, he's a claimed roleblocker, and his alignment will become more clear further down the road.

Means very, VERY little. You said you found him scummy. Despite him claiming roleblocker, you've already said you found him scummy.

You're saying two different things here, and actions speak louder than words. Unfortunately, your ties to AJ are questionable too, in that you could be sticking up for him because you know he's town.

AJ has done a poor job of defending himself. However, I think I'm onto something even juicier here.

unvote: Alabaska J
Vote: Jebus

I'll have to do a more thorough investigation later, but from what I've seen of your actions today, you're behaving quite suspiciously.

[Zilla]

I'm switching to Jebus on the notion that he could be trying to protect a townie this way so that he gains from a town-flip. Regardless, a scum AJ implicates both Jebus and Grimmy.

[Zilla]

I disagree; could you explain why you think that?

Charter's play and response was significantly poor, so much so that scum didn't have to even do anything to get him lynched. It's possible, however, that they "started the fire" because it was safe to do so. Still, the ones who analyze charter's wagon should be looked at closely, as they may be leading town away from the scum on the wagon.

Good to see our replacement has some integrity, which has been lacking so far.

Megatheories' long post against charter seems like seizing the reigns, but afterward, he's content to let others do the talking and leave his vote there. That's an example of "We didn't start the fire," though he clearly did.

[Zilla]

Jebus, why would you request Ooba before Braeden?

[Zilla]

Personally, I think the severity of the punishment should befit the severity of the breach. Obviously that rule is there for a reason, and the reason is to protect ongoing games from influencing each other. I'd say modkilling is warranted in situations where someone does something that actively influences the games, and not warranted when it's something benign or will not impact the other game.

For instance, "He was scum in this game where he was already lynched, and he had similar behavior" is more for warning than for modkilling, while "We're (living) masons in this (ongoing) game, so I know what she thinks like" is total grounds for modkilling.

Vote: Use good judgment when enforcing the rule

Nite, I'm not sure I'm picking up what you're laying down there. It's alright if you thought that, but I didn't get that feeling from that group. Further, even if that was the case, it appears not to be a scumtell judging by two of the people there being dead townies.

[Zilla]

Huh, I had forgotten my case in all this down time.

unvote: Jebus
Vote: Alabaska J

Thanks to AC for reminding me what it was. I forgot about his Nightfall weirdness.

I'm still suspicious of Jebus, and I'll remain suspicious regardless of Alabaska's flip, but I do think Alabaska is likely scum.

[Zilla]

VOTE COUNT

Alabaska J (3):

Zilla

Jebus

Nightfall
AC1983fan
Zilla

Jebus (2):

Alabaska J

Zilla

The Fonz

AC1983Fan (1):

Jebus

[Zilla]

Note that there may be some missing strikethru votes, I only started with the last count.

[Zilla]

I'm more toward relaxing the rule, but to enforce modkilling in the event that it's blatant and has no excuse.

[Zilla]

^ No, I totally don't buy it at all. Reading the posts in their original context, your original reason was just to get things going and you had no real motive to actually suspect Nightfall. Then suddenly you had a whole host of reasons to fall back on. It's especially shady that once your initial reasons were disproven, you bring out other reasons after the fact. There's absolutely no reason not to include them in the first post.

Also, you seem boastful of your excuse, as though that should take care of any suspicion on you ever, and it looks like "Yay, me, for figuring a way out of this! I award myself a cookie."

No cookie for you.

[Zilla]

Quick mind scan of players read in isolation:

TOTALLY TOWN = ac1983fan replaces Panzerjager, who replaced Megatheory, who replaced Numberfourteen
TOTALLY TOWN = Alabaska J
TOTALLY TOWN = DrippingGoofball replaces Braeden
TOTALLY TOWN = Grimmy replaces Anticollie ***
TOTALLY TOWN = Jebus
TOTALLY TOWN = Nightfall ***

TOTALLY SCUM = ooba replaces Gamma
SCUMMY = The Fonz replaces pacman281292
SCUMMY = Zilla replaces yawetag

Next, actually read the game!

I'd like explanations on Alabaska, Jebus, The Fonz/PacMan, myself/Yawetag, ac1983fan/Panzer/Megatheory/Numberfourteen...

Actually, I'd like explanations on everybody. There's very few I agree with.

[Zilla]

oy, I reread Alabaska in isolation, and I'd vote him harder if I could.

You dropped your case on Nightfall for NO reason at all, instead switching to Jebus because "It's too early to (vote me)." Nowhere do you explain why you consider Nightfall's disengage scummy. Your own post back then was "either way, you're giving me bad vibes," which amounts to "I'm accusing you, but I don't actually know the reasons why I'm accusing you, so it's just bad vibes."

Also, sorry about earlier with the drama thing, it was ambiguous if you meant Theater or drama in the game, and I thought you meant drama in the game was keeping you from posting.

Lastly, I'm thinking the early votes between you and Jebus were just showmanship for distancing.

I'm very interested in hearing your opinion on Nightfall right now.

[Zilla]

Mod: can we include a list of players that aren't voting with each vote count?

I'd like more explanation on your isolation reads, Goofball. I find isolation reads usually tell you a lot more about a person, and I want to know what you're basing these "tone analysis" reads on.

[Zilla]

Also, can you please answer the questions i asked of you? if you read me in isolation, you HAD to have seen them, so i'm curious as to why you didn't answer them in your post.

What, the self evident one that you can figure out when you actually read my post? The only "questions" I found was this:

so do you agree with me or ac1983fan about the posts he quoted?

Those "posts" aren't a part of my case on you. I can see where ac1983fan is coming from, but I don't agree you were outright defending Nightfall. To me, it looks like you rode the fence until someone gave you an excuse to vote them, and it was a pretty lame excuse.

[Zilla]

@ Zilla

What do you think about Jebus' willingness to hammer Alabaska?

Personally, I don't think a scum Alabaska flip clears Jebus, and a town Alabaska flip hurts him a little. I know if I was scum partners with Alabaska, I'd probably cash in on him by bussing him at this point. Unfortunately, if Alabaska isn't scum, he's a strong target for scum to gun for. I personally think he's scum, to quite a large degree. I still suspect Jebus is a partner despite his willingness to hammer.

[Zilla]

Wait, isn't Jebus already voting Alabaska? how can he hammer him?

[Zilla]

nvm, he voted ac1983fan, on ill-defined reasons.

I do find it strange that he switched off of Alabaska for that though.

[Zilla]

^ Except now you've basically done everything required to earn "just pointing out something and it will turn into WIFOM." If you mean roleclaiming, that's not townie. If you mean providing your targets, that's WIFOM and completely null. Other than that, I don't know what you could be talking about.

[Zilla]

It's already a WIFOM because you alluded to it. It's really fishy that you want other people to find it, that you have no faith in it being able to clear you if you present it yourself.

[Zilla]

So either alabaska explain your thing or Jebus swing that hammer.

[Zilla]

Alabaska J, for the love of god, if you're town, post your damn defense.

[Zilla]

And what, pray tell, is the case on Grimmy, such that the Fonz is clearly a scumbuddy, to the point that you voted The Fonz instead of Grimmy?

[Zilla]

Crash, additionally, do you see the case on Alabaska being on his roleclaim?

[Zilla]

^ Explanation please, especially given that the original reason needs clarification itself.

[Zilla]

there's one thing i think that i have done that is very townie that no one has said yet. i can't say, or else it will look like i'm just pointing out something and it will turn into WIFOM. I hope someone points it out sooner or later.

[Zilla]

Crash, additionally, do you see the case on Alabaska AS being ABOUT his roleclaim?

EBWOP for clarify.

[Zilla]

Case on alabaska, you missed his hypocrisy when he calls for more content in posts, his dodging of questioning, the fishy timing of his claim, and the current one where he claims he "did something townie" and won't back it up. ac1983fan also has a good post about Alabaska's case.

I'd vote Grimmy before I vote The Fonz, but I'm still convinced of Alabaska scum. I don't see CTD's case on The Fonz, and Fonz's responses are making me critical of CTD as well.

[Zilla]

Zilla, point out all of the questions i haven't answered.

I'm not accusing you of not answering anything except that "I did a pro-town thing!" bit. You like to include this, as if my case is based on you not answering something.

Zilla, tell me if you think that saying people need to post more when the game is slow, even if the person saying it hasn't contributed a lot is justification for a scum case. since then, i've posted content.

1: It's not basis for an entire scum case.
2: Your content has been defense mostly, with some OMGUS thrown in.

other people, such as jebus and the fonz (until recently) continued to active lurk, and you haven't looked at them the same way you've looked at me.

My case isn't about active lurking. ONE point of my case is about all the hypocrisy where you ask people to contribute more when you didn't contribute yourself, something The Fonz and Jebus aren't guitly of.

also, you said ac1983fan had a good post? you said yourself you didn't fully agree with his reasons:

Way to take things out of context and quote manipulate. I said I disagreed that you were defending Nightfall with the posts he quoted. I didn't say I disagreed with his case, and most of it reminded me of the way you treated Nightfall day 1.

Which reminds me, you did neglect to answer my question on what you thought of Nightfall now.

the fishy timing of my claim? i said i thought i was going to be hammered because i had the most votes at deadline, so i claimed and spilled my guts with some last second content.

You did it right before the last second, and you didn't include who you had roleblocked previously. It's just as likely you were scum with a last-minute gamble to get out of the noose.

Same goes for the analysis. I don't particularly trust it.

And yes, your argument that "scum wouldn't take the time" is horribly WIFOM.

[Zilla]

In that post, that was the questioning you were dodging. We asked MANY times for your "pro-town" thing, with you posting in-between and not answering it.

Fonz and I find Jebus suspicious, at least.

I'm tunneling because you're obvscum.

Hypocrisy is hypocrisy.

Your rectification is too little, too late, as it took calling you out on it to get you to post, and even then, you're only posting defensively.

Enlighten us, why do you find Jebus scummy?

[Zilla]

Your case on Jebus is shoddy. You've got two reasons, it seems. Reason 1 is OMGUS. Reason 2 is his inconsistency between me and yawetag.

I agree on reason 2. Now, I'd like you to tell me why you think it's scummy.

I'm more in favor of original material than quoting.

[Zilla]

^ That's no reason why he shouldn't answer the question.

[Zilla]

I have read the game. I have a few people I think are scum. Alabaska's at the top of the list. Next is Jebus, then DGB, then a distant CTD.

[Zilla]

Also, at this point I think knowing his alignment would help in finding other scum.

[Zilla]

Potential V/LA until Sunday night, I'd say about 30% chance.

[Zilla]

Props to me for causing the unlocking!

I feel like a tool, Alabaska and Jebus both came up town. Now, however, we finally have a dead scum to analyze. I'll be excavating for a while to see what I can find.

[Zilla]

While gamma's playstyle right now deserves to be watched, im not 100% sure its scummy behavior.

This is like textbook what scum say to defend other scum.

[Zilla]

Grimmy seemed to comment most heavily on Gamma/Ooba, AC1983fan, and Alabaska. I can't seem to mine much out of him in isolation, most of his posts were really fluffy.

[Zilla]

If we're looking at LyLo, claiming might be a good idea...

[Zilla]

Yeah, come to think of it, I don't see him breadcrumbing CTD as town.

[Zilla]

Hello Fonz SK. Probably good to work with you until the mafia's dead then.

I was thinking that AC1982 would look bad if Alabaska was town. He was my main suspect if Alabaska ended up being town, personally. I think the thing to do would be to see how other people reacted to Grimmy pushes, but I'm not in a position to invest the time into that.

[Zilla]

My vote is on CTD being next for being the one to suggest it.

[Zilla]

If it's 2 scum situation, no-lynching might have been a good idea, but now we have a claimed vig (read: SK) who is probably going to be killed tonight, and I don't think eliminating the Fonz does us much good for hunting scum.

[Zilla]

You claimed responsibility for a death; that's already tipped that you're a PR, and about as good as a claim.

[Zilla]

That seems a poor choice considering I was breadcrumbed as investigated by a cop. The best method is to have the scum claim first so they can be caught in lies.

In fact, despite being scummy for not cooperating, I refuse to claim until the end or until I think it's appropriete.

Nitefall is next.

[Zilla]

So are you saying, Jebus' claim aside, I've been scummy, thus warranting claiming?

[Zilla]

I am against the nameclaim for the simple fact that it could out a power role. Everyone knows the more infamous properties on the Monopoly board, and I believe that special roles would go with the 'special properties.' (speculating here)

A bit of breadcrumb from DGB's predecessor...

[Zilla]

I change my "next" to CTD.

[Zilla]

Imo, ac1983fan could be scum, Alabaska is scum, gamma/ooba could be scum, Fonz seems town and Zilla seems very town.

And what is the meaning of the triple star, dare I ask?

This seems more likely than "the list"

[Zilla]

I'm Mediterranean Avenue, I got nothing.

[Zilla]

ac1983fan replaces Panzerjager, who replaced Megatheory, who replaced Numberfourteen - Illinois Avenue, VT
CrashTextDummie replaces ooba, who replaced Gamma - Reading Railroad, VT
DrippingGoofball replaces Braeden - Boardwalk W/ Hotel, tracker
Nightfall - Free Parking, one-shot night immune
The Fonz replaces pacman281292 - Go, JoaT
Zilla replaces yawetag - Mediterranean Avenue, VT.

DGB claims N1, Nitefall didn't move (supported by roleclaim) and N2, Jebus investigated Alabaska J, while N3 was no-action submitted.

Fonz claims his only action was shooting Grimmy, and a previous attempt on Braeden "timed out." (not sure what this means)

-------------- FACTS END, SPECULATION BEGINS

I postulate Alabaska was framed. That quoted bit from Jebus reads like he knew Alabaska was scum, and his vote went straight onto Alabaska at the beginning of Day 3.

My top suspects at the moment are AC and CTD.

[Zilla]

Boardwalk is the most valuable property in the game, light blue. Mediterranean (that's me) was the least valuable property and is dark blue. St. Charles is just past jail, and is pink/purple. Illinois Avenue is past Free Parking and is red.

My belief in DGB's claim lies in Braeden's breadcrumbing. I do see that all the other properties are vanilla, but Boardwalk with a hotel is the single best individual piece of property you can own on the game, and I'd consider it to be "special."

However, that's about the only thing that's keeping me from suspecting DGB.

I'm a little nonplussed by CTD's non-reaction to me naming him as one of my two top-suspects. The most reaction it got was a subtle OMGUS saying I'm worth looking at.

[Zilla]

Nightfall, results of your analysis?

[Zilla]

There's also the possibility of a mafia framer framing Alabska.

[Zilla]

I've seen it in two of my six or so games here.

[Zilla]

Activity please?

vote: Crash Text Dummie

[Zilla]

SensFan would do it

[Zilla]

Actually, that's not entirely right. Sens would wait and hammer the first person in striking distance...

[Zilla]

Keeping my vote there.

[Zilla]

Crazy levels of intuition.

[Zilla]

Mod: prod ac1983fan

I don't think we can logic our way into finding scum this time, and I don't want to play "outguess the setup."

[Zilla]

What do you think of my vote on CTD?

[Zilla]

Lots. Why so defensive?

[Zilla]

Still waiting on an actual opinion on my vote too.

[Zilla]

Why don't you support a CTD lynch?

[Zilla]

... that's not what I meant.

I've had enough.

unvote: CrashTextDummie
Vote: ac1983fan

For dropping 5 scumtells this page alone (counting the lurking):

Come in from lurking (1) to comment on how indecisive the claims make you feel (2), not reacting to a potentially scummy vote (3), pushing on someone there is demonstrated support for lynching (4), and evading questions in such a way as to draw out more information as to what the questioner is looking for (5).

The number 5 one is the nail in the coffin for me, since I didn't follow up on that in Drawn Together mafia with Xtoxm, and he ended up being the last mafioso.

Further reasons to suspect ac1983fan: One of the main reasons I wanted to lynch Alabaska aside from his scumminess was because I felt it would help get a better read on the people pushing his case. Of those, I felt ac1983fan was likely to be scum if Alabaska turned out to be town.

[Zilla]

AtE doens't cut it.

[Zilla]

I frankly don't care about roles anymore, I feel extremely confident in CTD/ac1983fan being the scumpair. Fonz is out of the picture for being mafia for no contest on the Grimmy kill, and I believe DGB. Nightfall has been attacked by both CTD and ac1983 at key times that make it not look like bussing. CTD and ac1983fan have both tried to put suspicion on DGB by attacking her claim.

I think this case is shut and all we need is to close up the game.

Most telling is how CTD defends ac1983fan in 742.

[Zilla]

Your case on me is total BS, and CTD was just trying to point that out. I love how every time somebody points out that somebody's case on someone else is crap, they are supposedly "defending them".
Defending someone is saying "No, I disagree, I think they are town for reasons X, Y, and Z." CTD basically said "No, I disagree, your case is bad for reasons X, Y, and Z." Learn the freaking difference people.

And ac1983fan returns the favor and defends CTD.

I'll lynch either of them.

unvote: ac1983fan
Vote: CrashTextDummie

I actually think CTD is the better choice, myself.

[Zilla]

You are also either extremely lazy or using logic of the crappiest kind.

I'm not lazy in scumhunting, I'm just lazy in trying to communicate all the nuances that are giving you away. You're looking hard for logical ways to try to disprove the cases on you, and your approach to those arguments is scum trying to justify their "towniness" by skewing in-thread evidence. This goes for both you and ac1983fan.

[Zilla]

That's six pretty good power roles. I especially want Zilla's opinion on this.

You know what this is? This is you trying to make it sound like if I don't consider it from your point of view, you think I'm scummy for it. You're using the "that's overpowered town" thing as some kind of defense.

Personally, I don't think it's overpowered, but I play mafia where vanilla is pretty much unheard of. However, of all the claimed roles, a lot of them are pretty weak, IMO. Cop and JoaT are the heavy hitters, roleblocker next, one-shot doc and one-time bulletproof are next, and then tracker. Town trackers are relatively useless, IMO.

Fonz, can you kill whenever, or just once?

[Zilla]

Then I'd say Nitefell is clean. It makes no sense to have one-off bulletproof scum, and that's a far-fetched idea for a scumclaim IMO.

[Zilla]

Like I said, lazy in communication.

It's really hard to explain but both of your defenses aren't town defenses.

[Zilla]

It's not that you're counterpointing, it's the method you're using.

CTD's doing it wrong. I said it already, AtE doesn't cut it. "Just because you can't refute my defense." What defense? Your entire last thing was an appeal to emotion and WIFOM.

Throw in misrepresentation here for calling me defensive. I'm pointing it out where I see it, I didn't say he called me scummy, I was pointing out how he was trying to psychologically manipulate my thinking regarding power roles.

He claimed vanilla. If he's scum, he's obviously going to be pushing that scum claimed the power roles and that town shouldn't have that many power roles. He's trying to get DGB lynched. When he saw the question about whether it was possible for town to have that many power roles, he apparently wanted me to question that as well with his "I'm especially interested in hearing Zilla's take on it." There's no reason he would be interested in my view. The only reason he could have for putting that on there is to influence my view of it.

CTD's last post is way too much of an appeal to emotion. He's trying to make my case seem as insignificant as possible because he doesn't have any other way to defend against it (partially because it's based on psychoanalysis instead of logic).

[Zilla]

Wow, Gamma was a noob. Through all of it, I think he's more noob-scum than noob-town, what with blatant bandwagoning, no reasoning to his votes, and hammering charter.

[Zilla]

Oh my god.

unvote: CTD
Vote: DrippingGoofball

She posted her scumlist. Check her entry opinions with triple asterisks. She claims that was something she "was doing before the totally town" thing, and that she took some of them off.

Bull.

Grimmy is triple-starred, and turned up scum. If AC and CTD aren't scum together, I knew for certain Nightfall and DBG were scum together. I can't exactly back this up becuase it's all psycho-theory stuff based on where the pressure was being applied, especially by nightfall and CTD.

There are a TON of problems I have with CTD's post, but reading back through some of those links, it's pretty clear that DGB slipped in regard to Alabaska and her "totally town" lists, and I suspect HEAVILY that those asterisks were a MAJOR slip revealing her scumbuddies.

[Zilla]

Okay, I can back it up slightly because Nightfall has been defending DBG's claim.

I will admit I have been playing these last few pages totally irrationally, but it did help generate information that couldn't be obtained by logical arguing, and I needed some insight.

I, too, think AC's reaction wasn't bad. CTD's is horrible though, and if I hadn't looked over DGB's posts again, I'd still consider him my lynch candidate. I'll outline some of the problems I have with his post:

Calling Braeden's vote on Charter a "sudden U-turn" and opportunistic seems inaccurate. I can see the problem in his post in that, from a scum standpoint, he thinks he can lynch a power-role Charter, but also I felt the same way about Charter after his fake-death "you just lynched a power role" thing. Refusing to claim it made it extremely suspect.

"Liking AC's first vote," he votes confirmed-scum Grimmy, BUT he does so at a time when Grimmy wasn't in danger, and scum will often vote their partners when it is safe to do so. I dislike that CTD ignores this possibility.

Zilla [...] concludes that the wagon was mostly town-led. She betrays this thought on the very same page by voting Alabaska J, who was part of the wagon.

This is a horrible misrepresentation, as my vote on Alabaska had nothing to do with his position regarding Charter. Also note that "mostly town led" does not mean "there were no scum on the case." I don't see how one can draw a connection between my reasons for voting Alabaska and my views on the charter wagon.

I'm pointing out this post of Jebus again, because there is no earthly way he investigated Alabaska J on N2.

Jebus played irrationally for a cop. Nevertheless, I think it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the mafia has a framer or there was bussing involved. If the mafia switched Alabaska for one of their own, the investigation would show guilty as the target switches to the mafia, and the cop would VERY likely not be informed of this.


So I have problems with his analysis on some points.

[Zilla]

I agree with Nightfall. Other roles are not informed that their target was led astray, cops shouldn't be any different.

[Zilla]

I'm more apt to believe the tracking would lead to who was actually investigated, though that isn't necessarily true either. If the cop "visits" Alabaska but he had been switched with scumperson, the cop still went to Alabaska's "house."

[Zilla]

Lastly, I find this all irrelevant.

[Zilla]

I hadn't heard of the mod confirming your selection in your result post, just the information. i.e. the result would be "They visited <player>." And this:

the whole point of a bus driver is not to mess up night results, it is to allow the scum a way to kill a power role, which I think is odd in a game with only a one-shot doc...

I think is wrong; the whole point of a bus driver IS to mess up night results. I have no idea how a bus driver "allows the scum a way to kill a power role" any more than their actual NIGHTKILL ability.

Again, why is any of this all that relevant? Firstly, I believe the bus driver can lead to a guilty result on an innocent person, so I believe if Jebus targetted Alabaska and the bus driver targetted Alabaska for substitution, he would get a guilty result and DGB would see Jebus targetting Alabaska. If I were modding, that's how I'd resolve it. The driver's supposed to be a stealth role that messes up night roles, they always add confusion. Even if I believe that, I find a scum tracker more likely, and I find DGB scummy for completely separate reasons than her roleclaim.

[Zilla]

I've never seen bus driving used like that.

Regardless, I want to know why we're even talking about it. It's only remotely related to the actual case here, and either way it goes, it doesn't establish guilt either way on DGB. All it does is potentially make her claim more or less believable.

[Zilla]

Well, regardless of the reason for no kill, that puts us out of LyLo, I'm pretty sure.

I'm more inclined to believe Fonz's role also. The possibility still exists that he doesn't have roleblocking powers, but because he delcared to block CTD, Nightfall didn't submit a night action in order to convict CTD even though Fonz didn't submit a roleblock of his own. I STRONGLY suspect nightfall as the last mafia, and I'm surprised at the lack of kill if Fonz actually blocked CTD.

However, if our theories on number of scum is correct, we can afford a mislynch today.

[Zilla]

I'd like to hear Fonz' confirmation on who he blocked last night.

[Zilla]

There isn't much I can say about that other than I turned around at a crucial moment due to a case by CTD. I also stand by the asterisks thing being a huge slip.

[Zilla]

Vote: Nightfall

Maybe we'll get some discussion going.

[Zilla]

It's your move, scumboy.

[Zilla]

I don't think it was intentional.

[Zilla]

This isn't going anywhere... I'm satisfied with Nightfall being lynched. Someone who isn't satisfied, make some moves to get more information!

[Zilla]

I was right about the asterisks .

Sorry about being wrong on Jebus, but his play was rather inconsistant, IMO. He had as much conviction Alabaska was scum as he did that I was town, and the parallel language he used between the two made it seem more like he had investigated Alabaska.

[Zilla]

I believe this was a good game with a good setup. A little slow at times, but when activity happened, it was a good game.

Well, aside from poor DGB's slip making it obvious at the end, but I understand how that couldn't be helped after the fact.

[Zilla]

If you were planning on claiming a power role, yeah, boardwalk was a better bet. If you claimed Baltic with a power, I would have been onto you because I was powerless Mediterranean Avenue, which is the other purple property.