Mini 326- Buffy Mafia-Game Over

[Adele]

omgu...uh...er... carefully reasoned

vote: Aelyn

. Yes. Great deal of thought went into that

[Adele]

I’m currently thinking that patterns are yet to truly show; not so’s we can tell with any certainty, anyhow. PBuG and Stevie’s behaviour on page one looks to me like the usual game-start mindless spamming. Y’know? Spamwise’s comments, similarly, look entirely innocuous to my eye, and don’t worry me. But LostProphet’s response then to Spamwise… I don’t like it, not at all. Eh. That does not necessarily imply the scumminess, though, of Lostprophet - or copycat Stevie; their response may be genuine. Nevertheless, I, apparently like PBuG, Spam and notguilty, do feel cautious of stevie and lostprophet. Since lostprophet said what he saw and gave reasoning, I trust him somewhat more.

I don’t know if the above paragraph makes any sense to any of you… suffice it to say,

small FOS: Stevie

[Adele]

I would also like an RC from Stevie.

[Adele]

hmmm... remind me, wasn't Faith occasionally psychopathic?

(But then, many mostly nice people were from time to time)

[Adele]

lol, to know enough to have heard of her, you'd know not to claim her

[Adele]

@notguilty: hmm... that makes sense (amending "vig" as "other power, eg vig or backup"), except I'd expect 3 mafia plus an sk. 4 anti-town, 4 vanilla seems most typical in minis; that'd make any non-power-claimant even odds scum or niceguy (

assuming

that's the setup; don't forget that outguessing the mod tends to be a bad idea)

Also, I have a strong feeling he is Faith. But I'm not sure what alignment Faith would be.

As I say, we don't know the setup. A rolename cop's a real possibility in a theme game, and Stevie knows it. His claim really gives us no additional info on his allegiance.

Although I'd expect to see Faith as a power. The mention of vig brought it up - that fits her character well (including the possibility of meaning to kill a bad guy but... oops! that's a nice-guy human! )

Unvote, vote: Stevie

That brings him back up to one short of a lynch

so no fair speedlynching then claiming ignorance after.

[Adele]

Seems improbable to me... but then, improbable roles are far from unheard-of. I'll hold my vote for now, though.

[Adele]

I'd like to suggest that people take a quick look back over Twito's actions. After 2 comments about Stevie's behaviour, Twito hops on the bandwagon (post 21) the unvoted him pretty darn quick (post 36), for the reason that Twito had been brought up to 5 votes and Twito said he wanted to ensure there was a claim. Half the game ago, and he hasn't revoted since.

Immediately upon hearing the vote he claims to believe it, and everything he's said since has followed a formula of cautious disbelief + measured support = no action; this looks to me like scum trying to subtley discourage the wagon. Add on the disingenuously "accidental" confusion over timing feeding in to a role-limiting claim (presence in season 4) that doesn't really limit pro-town roles much at all, and the FOSes that he's sent out more recently on Aelyn & LP for frankly waeak reasons (everyone's had their say, right? This wouldn't be a quicklynch, merely efficient)...

I say we lynch Stevie today and, if he's scum, lynch Twito tomorrow.

[Adele]

Add on the disingenuously "accidental" confusion over timing feeding in to a role-limiting claim

Yeah well it was accidental..

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. In either case, we certainly shouldn't let it play to your advantage.

I say we lynch Stevie today and, if he's scum, lynch Twito tomorrow.

So you think I shouldn't even get a change to RC tomorrow if Stevie turns out scum?

I think it's a sensible gameplan, not a mindless one. Of course, if you look like the likely lynch tomorrow, people should give you the opportunity to claim if you want to. Please quote me where I said "quicklynch without discussion".

And sorry for changing my mind after claim. Is that completely againts what you believe in? And bringing up my suspicions, you know there ain't much to go on at this point..
Maybe you would prefer no talk and quicklynches.

Your opinion may do whatever it wishes to, but I that doesn't change the fact that what you are saying appears to follow a scummy pattern. The reasons you give are lame. The strength of your suspicions against Stevies seem near perfectly inversely proportional to the strength of general suspicion.
As to the second point, it appears to be general consensus that there

is

something solid to go on: Stevie.
Finally, I'm all for talk; I've hardly lurked, myself, and I've just raised some incredibly fabulous points against you (I think my modesty is my best quality, though ). Seriously, though, talk is an important part of this game, but so is action. I think it's stalling out because most people are satisfied with Stevie as the lynch. I also don't think that any new relevant info's likely to come up in his defence; I'm waiting on the hammer accordingly. There's nothing more I can do.

Also you might have noticed that there weren't counterclaim againts Stevie's claim. And yet Faith is a role I would expect in a game like this. We even had Clem so I wonder what makes you so sure of Faith not being in it.

Reread me. You'll find I explicitly stated I believe that Stevie

is

Faith; that he nameclaimed truthfully in case there was a rolecop in the game, but lied about his allegiance. How was I even the slightest bit unclear about this?

I'm not gonna possibly lynch an innocent townie based on you pressuring me into it. I rather keep discussing and see if we can get more info for today and tomorrow.

Right now if Stevie turns up town who would be next suspect?
So I'm supporting more discussion. And turns out I actually seem to be succeeding in making that happen.

It's actually not you I'm trying to convince right now. My current theory is that you are co-scum with Stevie, you wanted to ease pressure on him, get him out of trouble, I caught you and your only recourse is OMGUS. You suspect LP, you suspect Aelyn, you suspect me.

Of course

you're supporting more discussion if that stands a chance of saving you and your co-scum from the noose. But I think that Stevie's a solid lynch for today with, if he

is

guilty, a solid lead for tomorrow.

If you want to discuss this further, I'll grudgingly acquiesce. I can stand alone by my convictions.

[Adele]

How embarrasing. I just need to stop having theories .

Just some bits and pieces I found disturbing on re-read.

It's actually not you I'm trying to convince right now. My current theory is that you are co-scum with Stevie, you wanted to ease pressure on him, get him out of trouble, I caught you and your only recourse is OMGUS. You suspect LP, you suspect Aelyn, you suspect me. Of course you're supporting more discussion if that stands a chance of saving you and your co-scum from the noose. But I think that Stevie's a solid lynch for today with, if he is guilty, a solid lead for tomorrow.

Alarm bells, for several reasons. First and foremost, we now know both of Adele's alleged "scum buddies" to be townies. Looks like a classic case of a fizzled false dilemma if ever there was one. Also, note the other names she throws out; "You're suspicious of X, you're suspicious of Y." Obviously she mentions herself, too, but as an afterthought. It feels like a hedge-your-bets sort of move, and I don't like it.

Your first point makes no sense to me. I had two theories - "Stevie is scum" and "If Stevie is scum, Twito's probably scum too". The first was wrong so

technically

the second wasn't (a peculiarity of logic ). Anyway my point is that this was not a false dilemma. If I'd said that

either

Stevie or Twito were scum, that would be the false dilemma that I think you mean. Instead, I was just pushing for a duff lead (sorry).

The second part ("Also, note the other names she throws out..."). I didn't throw those names out.

I

noted the people that

Twito

mentioned. What is it you're scared I'm going to do with those names (to clarify, I listed them in order; Twito stated suspicion of LP in post 65, Aelyn in 68 and implied suspicion of me in post 73 - "Maybe you would prefer no talk and quicklynches" and suchlike)? Hedge my bets how?

I thought Twito's behaviour was scummy; I still do, but I was wrong that he was actually scum. I'll suck that up. My bad, as Buffy would say .

But what exactly are you accusing me of here?

[Adele]

...The second part ("Also, note the other names she throws out..."). I didn't throw those names out.

I

noted the people that

Twito

mentioned. What is it you're scared I'm going to do with those names (to clarify, I listed them in order; Twito stated suspicion of LP in post 65, Aelyn in 68 and implied suspicion of me in post 73 - "Maybe you would prefer no talk and quicklynches" and suchlike)? Hedge my bets how?

I thought Twito's behaviour was scummy; I still do, but I was wrong that he was actually scum. I'll suck that up. My bad, as Buffy would say .

But what exactly are you accusing me of here?

LP, I'm still waiting on an answer.

[Adele]

I'm against a mass claim. What we

need

is some participation.

mod,

could we get some

prods

out please?

For example, LP threw out a bunch of stuff nearly a week ago, and hasn't bothered to turn back up to answer my questions.

Besides, shouldn't a Day 2 LyLo be impossible in a well-constructed mini?

[Adele]

Nope, I'm still not clear on what I did that upset you. Problem is, your statements are still ambiguous. If you're saying what I think you're saying, I think that makes

you

look scummy. too much for me to hope, though, that you'd clarify and thereby did your own grave .

Are you suggesting that it's possible that I mentioned you and Aelyn so that I could attack you two later? Is that what this is all about? Because that's nonsense, considering:

...the FOSes that he's sent out more recently on Aelyn & LP for frankly waeak reasons...

I stated that Twito's suspicions were badly founded. I couldn't possibly have turned around and said "Twito suspected X and Y, see? They must be the bad guys!"

FOS: LP

for what

appears

to be deliberate misrepresentation.

[Adele]

I think you

have

misrepresented me, but I can't ever be certain, obviously,that it was deliberate.

What you posted, to me, looks like a set-up to attack other people later on if you happen to be wrong. I found, and continue to find, this suspicious. Currently, your behavior smacks much more so of that of a townie, so I'll decline to vote for you.

If I "happen" to be wrong? That makes no sense; if I'm scum then I wouldn't "happen to be wrong", I'd be lying, trying to attack townies. If I'm townie (natch) then your suspicion of me is misplaced in any case. This is what I mean by a nonsensical attack, and why I've been seeking clarification from you.

Why are you voting for Spamwise?

[Adele]

Vote: Lostprophet

Right now, I trust Spamwise.
Yes, he's appeared strange, but the things he's doing remind me more of good guys playing poorly than bad guys playing either poorly or well.

[Adele]

LP's voting you, Spam

Any chance of some, like, intelligent discussion any time soon? It's my day off tomorrow, so I'll try to get some started then.

[Adele]

^^ seconded, actually. That's where we're more lacking here (although LP hasn't really answered me to my satisfaction yet... but he's contributed a heck of a lot more than some).

[Adele]

Gut feeling is not a sufficient reason to accuse someone - people seem to have much more solid reasons to accuse you than you them, so all other things being equal, you are the more sensible prey. I disagree with their reasons, and thing that you shouldn't be their wagon, but I'm hardly enamoured with your style right now .

Glad you're apparently feeling better.

[Adele]

I think I'll keep my vote for now.

Since when is it smart to lynch a claimed mason?

Unvote, vote: Pbug

[Adele]

Unofficial Vote Count
Spamwise- 2 (Pug89)
LP- 1 (PBuG)
PBuG - 1 (Adele)

Not Voting: Notguilty, Aelyn, spam, LP

Okay. LP, after everything else, is rolefishing, Aelyn has not said anything of use for very nearly a month and notguilty last spoke two weeks ago. PBuG at least unvoted (though he needed prompting), so

unvote

.

Mod

, last Sunday PBuG requested a mass prod. Can you tell us whether you've prodded Aelyn and notguilty since then?

[Adele]

Vote: Lostprophet

It's a shame that his game was on the second page.

I don't understand. What game?

[Adele]

I'm afraid I cannot post a full defence right now (insert excuse here but I'm due at work in 40 minutes) - the one point I'd make, then, in the time that I have is:

People always analyze better than me That's a very thorough analysis, and I think I'll trust it. You brought up some very interesting points (especially Adele saying he's likely to be protown and then voting him). I'll agree with it for now.

Unvote, Vote: Adele

My point there was that I'd perhaps expect Faith in the game, but as power

or

scum -

not vanilla

, so the claim looked exceedingly unlikely to me.

[Adele]

Well, I hope your full defense addresses everything, because most of that stuff makes you very scummy.

Seems awfully sheepy...

OK I've had a read though and this is what I have come up with. After what happened yesterday my main suspicions lie with Adele and the way the Stevie lynch was handled and how she pressured Twito to hammer. I don't like it one bit.

I wasn't trying to pressure Twito to hammer - I think at one point I said "I'm not talking to you", actually - I was so focused on what I thought I'd discovered that he had become irrelevant to me as an agent.

I’m currently thinking that patterns are yet to truly show; not so’s we can tell with any certainty, anyhow. PBuG and Stevie’s behaviour on page one looks to me like the usual game-start mindless spamming. Y’know? Spamwise’s comments, similarly, look entirely innocuous to my eye, and don’t worry me. But LostProphet’s response then to Spamwise… I don’t like it, not at all. Eh. That does not necessarily imply the scumminess, though, of Lostprophet - or copycat Stevie; their response may be genuine. Nevertheless, I, apparently like PBuG, Spam and notguilty, do feel cautious of stevie and lostprophet. Since lostprophet said what he saw and gave reasoning, I trust him somewhat more.

I don’t know if the above paragraph makes any sense to any of you… suffice it to say,

small FOS: Stevie

Although this is a very wordy paragraph I do agree with her points on the early spamming behavior. It was harmless. What i find odd about all this is that rather commit to her points about Stevie and LP she throws a

small

FOS in Stevie's direction. That makes no sense to me and just feels all wrong. Scum weighing in on the first important point of the game without trying to look too eager perhaps? Perhaps I'm being overly paranoid about the use of the word “small”

It just tweaked a little and I wanted to be clear on that - that it wasn't an accusation per se. I also do explain in that paragraph why I was FOS-ing Stevie and not LP - Stevie was just agreeing with the post above him, which tend to worry me sometimes.

OK more people come in and vote Stevie and I can understand why, players like that annoy me too, with the whole “I'm generating discussion” as an excuse to act scummy. That said, it looks like he archived his goal cause he's giving me things to work off.... anyway

I would also like an RC from Stevie.

What? Why? This is Adele's

very

next post. So we jump from a “well he's kinda suspicious” to a “Claim your role now!” with no explanation in between. I don't get that at all. I'm sure after reading this Adele you'll come up with a few great reasons why you wanted Stevie to role claim but my point is why did you not post those reasons there and then? In essence, your doing pretty much what Stevie was in that you're leaving no explanation for your actions. Not a good thing.

WTH??? It's right there: "I would

also

like an RC"

Quick PBPA of what people said between those two posts:

Stevie

: Vote Jecht

notguilty

: vote Stevie

Twito

: VC plz, Stevie has 5 votes, Maybe RC? Unvote

Spamwise

: Stevie's just an idiot IMHO

Stevie

: I am generating discussion

Twito

: & making urself look scummy, stop it!

Pug89

: FOS Stevie; U R not helping. Want to hear defence, am considering voting

Spamwise

: "I am generating discussion"

was

his defense

notguilty

: any other defence stevie?

LP

: Stevie sucks, not helping. vote stevie

Twito

: Want RC. FOS Stevie

Armlx

: VC (Stevie on 5, 6 to lynch)

Adele

: also want RC

So. With 5 votes, and at least one person who only unvoted him in order to give him a chance to defend himself / RC (RC's having been mentioned already by Twito twice), after Stevie presented what appeared to be the length and breadth of any defence he was likely to, you think it's scummy not to give a blow-by-blow of why I want an RC?

[Sotty7]

...

Unvote, vote: Stevie

That brings him back up to one short of a lynch

so no fair speedlynching then claiming ignorance after.

...and I don't like your little disclaimer attempting to sound pro town by warning everyone all it needs is one more vote for a lynch. It feels like your already trying to distance yourself from what you know will be a failed lynch.

Your shifting the responsibilities of the lynch on to the next person to vote Stevie

when really, all on his wagon are responsible for it. [/quote]Bullcrap; I am not. I am closing the door on a pseudo-accidental lynch. Absolutely, all on the wagon are responsible (including your predecessor), but some are more responsible than others and it's pretty common for scum to drop the hammer out of the blue and then say they didn't realise that was a lynch. I've seen it happen more than once, and I'm still pretty new.

[quote="Sotty7]The town talks about no one buying that Faith is just a simple townie. Nobody mentions that although Stevie acted crazy he didn't really have anything to gain from it. If he was scum he was drawing attention to himself and if he was town he would just make an easy lynch. [/quote]Um... assuming you're right about that... then, I'm evil because I missed something that absolutely everyone else missed?

Then Adele pops up again here and starts talking about Twito and to be honest I don't like this because I got a very strong pro town vibe from him while reading the game. I'm willing to put a little of that down to hindsight for me as I knew he was pro town, but still I felt nothing scummy from his posts. I also don't like this because she was trying to set up todays lynch as well and that's never a good thing. I think Twito gave valid reasons for why he was willing to believe Faith as a townie and Adele was looking to put pressure on one of the other active players to make them cave and hammer Stevie

Twito of course responds (with some good points) but then so does Adele here with some equally good points and this is where I doubt my instincts. But then Adele is a very good player from my experience so just because I can understand her reasoning doesn't mean I should buy it. Each paragraph is a good point until the end. She outlines that she believes Twito to be Stevie's scum partner and to me it feels like she's just applying more pressure to Twito to be the hammer vote by saying he's scum, so he'll say “no I'm not, look vote: Stevie”

What? Wait, I raise many valid points against Twito, present my conclusion, because I am scum hoping against hope that Twito (who, according to this theory, I know to be innocent) will act in a scummy manner and lynch someone just to look more innocent to the rest of us? That was

not

the pro-town response to my accusations of him. What's my next cunning manouvre? Get some cops to claim different results than those they got?

[quote="Sotty7]... Also he ends up dead during the night. Maybe Adele and her scum buddies decided to off him or the other killing group decided to make Adele look bad and kill him off instead. Either way, with how day one went Adele is looking quite bad in my eyes.[/quote]This is where the whole thing falls apart. That makes no sense.
In the hypothetical where I am scum, what am I doing? Taking pains to stand out, accusing a twonie pair of being a scum pair (so that when one dies, the accusation will lose all authority), desperately attacking one person in the hopes that they'll hammer another (an unproductive reaction) and then killing that person in the night because...? How does his death make me look bad?I don't get it.

I've gotten it a couple times this game; people saying "Adele says XYZ and that looksz suspicious" without saying

why

it looks suspicious, and I don't know how to defend myself against an attack I don't even understand.

So I will say this: Stevie was probably going to die. My speculation would have given a lead to follow today if Stevie turned out evil (as I, like most, thought he would). As soon as night fell and Stevie turned up innocent, everything I said about Twito became moot.

Now LP and Adele seem to be arguing over something, but to be honest, the whole exchange confuses me. I'm not quite sure what they are arguing over but it's interesting to watch. I had a few suspicions about LP mainly because I couldn't remember anything that he really did in the game. Going after Adele is the right thing in my mind, but the way he did was a little strange, to me anyway.

LP's on my suspect list; I may well be revisiting my original tweak on him.

PBuG – Not a whole lot of content but pretty constant. Keeping a vote on a claimed mason is a little iffy but understandable seeing how Spam has been playing

I don't like how he targeted Spam and I don't like how he's targeting me - "I agree with above" posts are a tell, especially when the argument's as weak as I think sotty's accusation of me is.

SpamWise – Acted scummy then claimed mason. Claim fits his actions sadly as I've seen masons play this way just because they have something to fall back on

And it doesn't seem to fit his player profile to be that incredibly gutsy precedent-breaking scum who goes ahead and claims mason.

[votes Adele]...mainly for the poorly reasoned vote on Stevie combined with asking for a role claim when having no real reason to do so. The stuff with Twito is all really conjecture, even I'll admit that, but it all adds up and I think she is the scummiest player in the game right now, so most likely to be scum. Hence my vote.

1. The problem with that is that there were

clearly

good reasons to vote for Stevie - else how did he hit a majority? My reasons were fairly well represented, I think... he seemed scummy prior to the RC, and then the RC seemed very improbable to me. I'm a huge Buffy fan, and Faith as a vanilla? Pfff. Possibly a vig, yes, but Stevie claimed vanilla and no townie would

ever

lie, right? (Okay, that's me being idealistic, sorry)

[Adele]

I thought I should put this seperately: I think we

are

in LyLo. With 2 deaths a night, it's reasonable to assume there'll be 2 deaths tonight bringing us down (after today's lynch) to 4 people. Even if there is a scum group of 2 and an sk, assuming worst case scenario of bad lynch & no crosskills tonight, 2 of 4 living tomorrow will be in a scum group --> a scum win.

And it's four to lynch today. And I have 2 votes on me. So if both voters are GG's then the scum can jump on and win the game.

Which would be bad.

[Adele]

Many apologies for my absence... not that you've done all that much in the meantime.

Hello...rest of the town?

FOS: Adele

- Just to keep the pressure there.

Maybe some prods are in order? Spam hasn't posted for a week now

I'm sorry, I thought I'd answered enough of your points sufficiently well that you were satisfied.

Okay, well, going back to:

What? Wait, I raise many valid points against Twito, present my conclusion, because I am scum hoping against hope that Twito (who, according to this theory, I know to be innocent) will act in a scummy manner and lynch someone just to look more innocent to the rest of us? That was not the pro-town response to my accusations of him. What's my next cunning manouvre? Get some cops to claim different results than those they got?

I honestly did not find Twito scummy at all from reading his posts. But like I said in the last post I already knew him to be pro town so I'm willing to believe some of my feelings of him being innocent was because of that, but still I don't think Twito was scummy for not revoting Stevie and he seemed to be the only person willing to buy his role claim and he did give reasons why based on the timing of the series. Basically, I don't agree you had valid points against Twito. That's the whole point of this little theory of mine.

Sorry, when I said "I raise many valid points against Twito", I thought I was paraphrasing this:

Twito of course responds (with some good points) but then so does Adele here with some equally good points and this is where I doubt my instincts. But then Adele is a very good player from my experience so just because I can understand her reasoning doesn't mean I should buy it.

Each paragraph is a good point until the end.

She outlines that she believes Twito to be Stevie's scum partner and to me it feels like she's just applying more pressure to Twito to be the hammer vote by saying he's scum, so he'll say “no I'm not, look vote: Stevie”

Basically, then, I think I complete my reply to you by saying that if I were scum then there does not appear to be any benefit to tying two townies together as likely co-scum (I can't see a scenario in which that behaviour would benefit me), so the fact that I associated two players that turned out to both be townies is not evidence that I am scum (though it isn't evidence that I'm pro-town either; I

think

that it's neutral). So, then, the remaining reason for distrusting me is for too sudden, dramatic and unexplained an increase in suspicion towards Stevie. For that, I can only apologise. I agree, it was lazy, it was unhelpful, and it reflects badly on me. I

don't

think that it's enough, taken alone, to suspect me when there are several others who are behaving more suspiciously.

I hope that's now a comprehensive rebuttal. If I've missed anything, do say so.

Mod

, I know I'm hardly one to talk, but could we get some prods down here?

PBuG, you're acting very oddly indeed; I didn't like your vote on me (you know what I mean ) and I don't like your vote on LP. It might be that you're very busy, and i can respect that, but three votes on LP versus a total of 38 words on LP - and I'm including the votes and the joke. Doesn't seem overly towntastic to me. IGMEOY though, to be fair, IGMEOE (everyone)

[Adele]

OK - Why isn't he coming off as town in your opinion?

I reread the entire thread and I thought the scummiest person was lostprophet because of certain things he did and said.

Oh, come on, PBuG! Sotty asked the question four times, and you've been here long enough to know what a valid answer is, yet you've been stonewalling on the issue for nearly a week (and, more damningly, across three posts).

[Adele]

Do we need replacements to come in, or should we just lynch with less than all the salient facts at a critical point in the game?

Lurker lynching is a seriously weak strategy, but lurking cannot be allowed to become advisable scum off-radar strategy. Catch-22.

That said, as much as I'd like to with Pug a happy birthday and everything, he's currently top of my Lynchworthy List.

[Adele]

Yeah, I meant PBuG - my finger slipped.

Look, he's acted overly aggressive, has claimed to have had reasons and yet failed to provide them. That aggressiveness and avoidyness adds up to the profile of a bad guy.

One more chance. If PBuG does not provide adequate reply within the next 100 hours, he can expect my vote. I'm not asking for a PBPA of the game in general, or a roleclaim - I want to be specific here -

I want an explanation, PBuG, of why,

specifically

, you voted LP each of the three times, with quotes from LP and your thought process as to why they made him look scummy

.

[Adele]

Overly aggressive? Honestly, that's bullshit. I've done some lurking (my bad) and some bandwagoning (again, my bad) but I have not been aggressive. I can't find the posts because I don't have the time. My grandmother is in the hospital having a pancreas surgery and I'm going to visit her today. I can post an adequate reply tomorrow. And, Adele, the second two times I voted LP were revoting for the same reasons as the first vote.

"overly aggressive" was inaccurate, I agree after looking back over the last few posts - more like rather aggressive, but continually and, worse, with no reasons, bad reasons, or a mere reference to other peoples' reasons (the "I agree with above post" syndrome). However:

Vote: lostprophet

DAMN CODING. I'M NOT YOUR BITCH, BITCH. (I've always wanted to say that...)

Was the first vote on LP - I don't know what that means. I thought it was merely a joke. It was triggered by this:

Vote: JechtMurray

. He knows why.... 8)

Which seemed quite clearly to me to be a reference to an out-of-game (probably other-game) situation between the two.

Let's not forget you suggested a mass claim (weak tell). you've stated who you'll switch your vote to if LP convinces you he's town - llike you're desperate to keep a vote out there, on someone, when my hasty comments earlier laid out why it was important we tread lightly with votes today. You

held a vote on a claimed mason until pushed to unvote after suggesting we were in LyLo

.

You're very, very scummy-looking to me. Granted, I've no love for the lurkers either, but I think you're at least an equally safe lynch, plus we can ask you to defend yourself - as I am now doing - so you're the preferable focal point at this time.

[Adele]

Jecht was Anya, a 3,000-year-old ex-vengance demon, Xander's girlfriend, and sales assistant at the Magic Box (for those of you who don't know). Roleblocker. Which means (unless there are 2 RBs in the setup, which is unlikely) that there are no RBs left.

I'll claim if you need me too, but I doubt you'll believe it because of my action on the first night, unless there's a roleblocker who targetted me.

Which makes this marginally problematic, but nothing to get our knickers in a twist over, right now. If we decide, down the line, to perform a chainclaim, then we can assess the matter then. I don't think I'm calling for a claim from PBuG specifically, though.

[Adele]

Just letting everyone know, I will be getting my wisdom teeth removed tommorrow so I probably won't be posting for a few days.

I choose to take this as a commitment to become an active participant by next weekend, merely accompanied by an apology that this activity cannot be immediate

[Adele]

I'm starting to wonder whether a mass claim might be helpful. To clarify, the last thing I'd want is unilateral claims. Rather, I think that a discussion, followed by a vote, on a mass rolename and role

chainclaim

might be a useful course of action.

[Adele]

After reading why Pbug voted for my predecessor and looking at my role I have no real choice but to

VOTE PBUG

I would have been FAR more aggressive I assure you.

Except

that that makes 2 votes on PBuG, which is dangerous for reasons I went into earlier in the game (post 156). Please unvote, so we can try, you know,

talking

first.

[Adele]

After reading why Pbug voted for my predecessor and looking at my role I have no real choice but to

VOTE PBUG

I would have been FAR more aggressive I assure you.

Except

that that makes 2 votes on PBuG, which is dangerous for reasons I went into earlier in the game (post 156). Please unvote, so we can try, you know,

talking

first.

Thanks for the warm welcome . You could try like, well i dont know, saying what you, er kinda mean, without the, you know, whats it called? ow sarcasim.

UNVOTE

I wasn't being sarcastic - I literally meant everything I said. Perhaps I came off as being harsh, and I apologise for not posting a welcome, but by that time you had already done something potentially game-losing and I thought that sending up the alarm was the priority. Your second post of the game was aggressive, and the nature of this aggression suggests you hadn't even read the game carefully first.

I love Buffy. A lot. Seriously. But when it comes to the game, I will at times be task-oriented. If people ask me to explain or defend myself, I focus on that. If the game's in a lull, I'll provide a suggestion on how to get back in gear. If someone does something foolish, I'll say so, loud and clear so there's no chance that they'll miss it.

I'll just go ahead and claim first.

I'm Season 5 Spike. I'm a bodyguard role, so I protect someone, but if that person is targetted to be killed I die instead. However, I protected someone who died Night 1, so I believe I was roleblocked. I am also not allowed to cast the lynching vote because of the chip in my head.

GAH!

Isn't that what I just said

not

to do? I certainly don't think you should gain the right to nominate next claimer if we

do

go ahead with the claim.

PBuG, Spam: What do either of you think about a chainclaim? you've all posted since the suggestion but not commented.

David: am I to presume, then, that you oppose it? You mention that your role justifies your behaviour (and your predecessor's), yet your last post doesn't state outright that you have reason to disbelieve PBuG's claim.

Regarding PBuG's claim, specifically the claim that he protected someone who died N1...

Fritzler - Riley Finn- Doctor stabbed night 1
Cogito Ergo Sum- Clem- Townie neck broken and slashed N1

Anya, roleblocker, died N2, so we can be reasonably certain we had an active RB N1 and possibly N2 (depending on nightchoice order... anyone know the standard in this sitch?). Since RB's probably tend to RB whenever they can, and since it's improbable that there are 2 RB's in a mini, it seems highly likely that exactly one person was roleblocked N1. That makes the claim slightly risky, and not apparently intrinsically beneficial since PBuG could easily have said from the start that he defended someone who had survived - however we cannot use that as evidence that PBuG's telling the truth (due to WIFOM).
It's also worth noting that this game had a doc (Riley/Fritzler). Bodyguard

and

doc in the same game? They couldn't qutie set up a Circle Of Awesome Protectiveness, but they could get pretty close. I don't like it. However, I want to know more before I act. I certainly don't want to summarily lynch PBuG; I think a slightly longer day today would be smart. We need info.

[Adele]

And note that, as a bodyguard, I did not protect someone, I died in their stead.

Yes, but what if you were protected? If bodyguard targets doc and doc targets bodyguard, there's a feedback loop. If scum tries to kill bodyguard, he'd live, obv, but what if the scum targeted the doc? Logically, the doc's protection should save the bodyguard from the reflected kill.

Either way, it does seem to me a little unbalanced to have a doc and a bodyguard in the same game; potentially breaking in a mini.

[Adele]

I watch Buffy, and although I'm not sure why Spike is of all things a bodyguard, I understand the not being able to vote the lynching vote.

Season 5 Spike being a bodyguard makes some manner of sense - he's working with the Scoobies at that point, and he protected Dawn's secret at significant harm and risk to himself, for example, in "Intervention". On the other hand, of course, I don't think there's a single season (besides season 1, obv) in which Spike doesn't do

some

real evil (whether it's really him or not, if you follow).

[Adele]

Okay. But for your second point, after the chip was put in Spike's head, he was prevented from doing evil. So, no, I don't follow.

Well, no, he wasn't prevented from doing evil. He would (usually) suffer intense pain when he tried to hurt a human.
He did, however, manage to manipulate the Scoobies to their detriment (Season 4's Yoko Factor), tie Buffy up and threaten to set another vamp on her (Season 5's Crush), nearly rape Buffy after she became an exception to the chip (Season 6'sa Seeing Red), and kill a buncha folk under the influence of the First (Season 7's Conversation with Dead People).
Also, he could always beat up and kill nonhumans who, such as in the case of Clem (CES), can be protown.

[Adele]

Bleh. It's not gonna magically just happen (vengeance-inspired magic orgies notwithstanding); we need to do something, and HAMMAH is

not it

; we can't be doing with a dumb lynch today. Does

anyone

have

any

suggestiong besides a mass claim? I'm not willing to lose this one to inertia.

[Adele]

Alright then Sotty.

My top two suspicions: Pug and Lostprophet.

How about everyone post their top two suspicious people

and reasons

I dont think my role will help that much but if people want to cross me off thier list I will claim. It may get a bit more disscussion going???

Just to clarify, I for one am

against

willy-nilly voluntary claims - the value of the chainclaim is in forcing claims from the more suspicious and less willing at early stages of the claim when they have limited info on what's safe to say.

My top two suspicions would likely be

notguilty

for the undercontribution (a really frustrating trait, since it makes him unreadable, which technically should make him least trustworthy, but doesn't make him likeliest to be scum) and

Pug89

for, generally, not helping out much. Possibly DAS - I didn't like LostProphet's behaviour, but DAS has been so... willing, I guess, that I instinctually want to cut him some slack for his predecessor's misdeeds.

[Adele]

Vote: PBug

For speculating on the makeup of the game in post 111 (which got my predecessor in trouble) and for his post 119 wherein he was confused by post 116.

Also I figure that with Willow being confirmed as cop, we probably wouldn't have 2 cops so believe that Spamwise was probably breadcrumbing a mason partner. So I am striking Adele and Spamwise of my radar (at least for now).

Now

that's

scummy-looking. Are you speculating on the identity of the co-mason there? If so, why do it publicly?

[Adele]

Okay, so it seems as though most people are on board for a nameclaim - which means, in turn, that we have consequences in place for anyone who tries to wriggle out partway through. If I were to choose the first person to claim, it'd be either Pug89, for his underposting, or Brizzi, who, while I understandthat he's not got a rep for discretion, is a replacement (ergo predeccessor lurked bigtime, is tell), gave out potentially damaging info (which spamwise then confirmed - thanks, spam ), in a move that commented on who he trusted and why, rather than entirely focusing on who he

suspecte

(which is what we wanted to hear) and why.

Also, I have band camp all next week so I will probably be unable to post untill the weekend.

The thing is, I'm not entirely clear on which week is meant by this, given that he posted it on Monday. Will he be able to post this weekend? If he doesn't go first, is there a chance that when someone nominates him the claim will stall (speedy claims are the best)?

So, I want either Pug89 or Brizzi to claim first, and I defer to spam to make the call as to which.

One last note. In the past, people have attempted to stop claims partway through, stating that useful info had come up, and the town should move on it. I thought they were scum, I was right, and I will assume the same if anyone tries to pull similar tricks in this game.

[Adele]

Where'd my post go?

Okay, nm. I'll summarise.

I'd want Pug89 or Brizzi to go first. My issue with Brizzi going first is that at any point someone might nominate pug89 and the claim halts; speedy chainclaims are advisable. however, I leave it to spam to select one of the two (at which point, it would commence).

I will automatically assume anyone who tries to pull "we've got some useful info, let's act on it, and maybe continue the claim tomorrow"-type BS to be a scummzar.

[Adele]

Sorry about my last post - I couldn't (for some reason) see several of the recent posts, including the one I'd previously posted.

Brizzi, it's entirely up to you who goes next. Perhaps, to make things clear, people would like to follw their claim with "

nominate: name

"?

I also think that we should hold off all analysis until we're through...

[Adele]

Game Specific Note: This game is not chronologically set anywhere in the show, so a Character from season 4 could be in the game with a character from season 7, and a character from multiple seasons could be them from any of those seasons.

Where was it said that it's exclusively seasons 4-7?

Why are you just jumping on the first clear scum you think you see? We have a lot of info to sort through, a speedy lynch hurts the town, so perhaps we should stand away from the polls for at least a short while.

for that,

FOS: DAS

[Adele]

Claimlist
PBuG - Spike, Bodyguard + can't cast lynching vote
BrizzyBoi (notguilty) - Amanda (Potential Slayer) - Back up vig
Pug - Amy Madison, from season 1 - a townie.
Sotty (Aelyn) – Buffy - Vig
DavidAngelSummers (lostprophet) - Joyce - Vanilla

1. If Sotty is scum, then Pug is (99% sure to be) scum: it's faintly possible that armlx gave him a misleading pm stating that if Buffy died he'd become the vig but knowing that, since there's no Buffy in the game, there's no chance of him becoming vig. I don't buy that. Also, backup vig? Seems broken...
2. If Pug is scum, Sotty may well still be innocent: there may be a scum with investigative powers, or they may have guessed there was probably a Buffy in the game who was probably vig.
3. Bodyguard in a game with a doc seems, as aforementioned, unbalanced.
4. Vanilla Amy makes less sense to me than vanilla Faith. Especially since Amy was in only one episode in season 1 (although the character was, at that point, vanilla).

I

suggest

that we lynch one of this three: PBug, BrizziBoi and Pug89, and ask Sotty to vig one of the remaining two.

[Adele]

Oh yuk. Yes, you're right, typo, my bad. The reason why I specify the three is that I believe that either 2 or all 3 of them are scum.

Sotty, did you at any point breadcrumb a Buffy-vig relationship? If so, that helps explain where brizzi could have got his claim from.

Also, the last few speed-votes on Pug? Yeah, major

FOS everyone who voted

. Seriously, each of these people have attempted to knock someone off before everyone gets a chance to weigh in, and I don't want to excuse DAS because his claim was relatively plausible. Let's face facts: Joyce, townie? Not a hard claim to come up with, vanilla's a safe role to claim at this stage and there was next to no chance of contradiction since he went last and all.

Actually, besides spam and myself, I don't really trust anyone, but my prime suspects are Sotty and the Pugsy pair.

[Adele]

Actually, besides spam and myself, I don't really trust anyone, but my prime suspects are Sotty and the Pugsy pair.

Gah! What am I, legally obliged to mistype? Obviously, I meant

Brizzi

and the Pugsy pair.

[Adele]

If I get lynched and consequently have my innocence proven, that should confirm Sotty's innocence as there was no counter-claim to Buffy. Right??

I therefore urge everyone to take a long hard look at PBuG and davidangelsummers.

How does one statement lead to the other? I must be missing a step in that argument.

[Adele]

Sorry, second statement is just my suspicions. In no way linked but when my innocence and by association Sotty7's how many other suspects are left anyway?

The second sentence's grammatical structure confuses me. Are you trying to suggest that "If Brizziboi is innocent, Sotty7 is innocent" in any way implies "Brizziboi is innocent"? I maintain that it does not, and that you are therefore still among the prime suspects - but your death scene might provide us some useful information, so would provide the townies something of some value whether you are guilty or innocent.
___________________________________________________
I have just thought of something else. Unlikely, hypothetical but distinctly possible case for you to all consider:

Sotty is evil lying scum. She is not a vig but is mafia or SK. If she's evil, Brizzi's 95% likely evil, and probably in the same scum group. If she's evil, she won't do what we ask of her tonight, since a bad lynch lets her go ahead and win (assuming no cross-kills or whatever). Therefore, today's lynch, which is in the power of the town, needs to be damaging to Sotty in this hypothetical while still a sensible play outside it

Conclusion: I believe that we should lynch

Brizziboi

, and ask Sotty to NK Pug89 or PBuG as she prefers. Unless someone contributes a counterargument that really makes me think again, I'll be putting my vote on Brizzi in about 36 hours (that's me practising what I preach about not quickvoting in these delicate stages; maybe you'll all listen this time?)

[Adele]

Wow, I realise that I am the best play for the town's lynch today based on the information we have.

Yeah, I can't see a flaw in it. Okay, I know this is a few hours early, but I'd rather do it before my shift than after.

vote: Brizziboi

[Adele]

So, Brizziboi has 3 votes, from me, Pug89 and myself? 4 to lynch?

No-one vote Brizziboi

, I've had an idea. I very much want the next vote on Brizzi to be placed by PBuG; he's claimed to be incapable of casting the lynching vote, which is a directly provable/falsifiable aspect of his claim. I call upon him now to demonstrate it - obviously if he refuses he should be the vig target tonight.

So, when I said "no-one vote Brizziboi", obviously I meant

"Sotty, spam, das, don't vote. PBuG, please vote for Brizzi now"

.

[Adele]

Ah, dammit.

[Adele]

Dammit, dammit, dammit. Bloody LyLo. Scum majority in Day 2, was it?

...so Buffy was evil and Warren was good? Bit of a stretch, I gotta say. GG, but roles a smidge too improbable?