Mini 561: R-1000 Mafia (Game over!)

[opie]

vote: Rigel

[opie]

aioqwe, who said anything about death miller masons and megalomania SKs? I confused by your response to Rigel.

[opie]

In my above post aioqwe should be replaced by armlx. Sorry guys.

That said, armlx, I didn't really clue into what you were getting at, but now I understand.

Anyways.

Unvote
Vote: Sarcastro

How could you forget?

Mod edit
Votecount:
chaotic_diablo (2): andersonw, aioqwe
skitzer (1): ZONEACE
armlx (1): springlullaby
Rigel (1): armlx
Dean Winchester (1): skitzer
Andersonw (1): Rigel
aioqwe (1): Sarcastro
Sarcastro (1): opie

Not voting (2): DeanWinchester, chaotic_diablo

With 11 alive it's 6 to lynch.

[opie]

Why not.

Unvote
Vote: Rigel

Why are we picking on Rigel again?

[opie]

unvote

I'm not so sure I agree with chaotic_diablo on this one. I'm didn't get the sense that Rigel was role fishing there. I do see was chaotic_diablo is picking up, but I'm not sure that it amounts to role fishing.

vote: DeanWinchester

Not for any meta reasons. I'm looking at you aioqwe. But maybe a couple of votes on him will help him help us not let this game fail. As he puts it.

[opie]

I agree that on its face it appears to be fishing. But if this were a true issue of scum fishing for a role, then it just seems clumsy and ham fisted. This fact makes me give pause as to whether or not it is a true scum tell. For me it is something to note as we move forward.

[opie]

@springlullaby, in Post 68, aioqwe voted for DeanWinchester based on meta reasoning. In Post 69, I was distinguishing my vote from his, because it was not based on meta.

@armlx, first, what did spring lullaby catch and what reasoning did she provide? Second, what are the three band wagons I've been on?

I've had for votes. One for Rigel which was a typical random first vote. One vote for Sarcastro was a bit of a joke for forgetting the game. Another vote for Rigel to get this game moving. And my last vote for DeanWinchester for complying about the lack of activity in the game but failing to provide anything that would help fix that. That was too was to help get this game moving.

So what is your vote for me based on?

[opie]

Yes, my vote for DeanWinchester was "wagon-ny". I voted such to get this game moving along since there continues to be little activity. And my vote for Rigel was Post 64; my vote for Dean Winchester was Post 69. How much wind shifted?

[opie]

armlx, I'm surprised you are happy with

any

lynch after only four pages of information. I have my suspicions but I'm not ready to lynch anyone at the moment. Especially when we have so little contribution for so many people.

[opie]

It really irks me when people respond to a prod, with "I haven't had much to say".

[opie]

I've reread, chaotic_diablo's case against Rigel. So far today it's been the best case against anyone. I know I didn't think much of the initial attacks against Rigel for role fishing but I think he is the best lynch for the day, but his response to the case against him is a bit lacking.

Unvote
Vote: Rigel

[opie]

I get the feeling that this is more of a safe claim. To me, a vanilla claim does not prove to me one way or another. The only claims that make me stop and think are power claims. I think we need to avoid the trap that good guys historically will be town and bad guys historically will be scum. Especially when there are figures that could go either way. Christopher Columbus for example could be cast in either a good guy or bad guy role, depending on which side of the ocean you lived.

Sarcastro, I know that Shakespeare fits in the theme, but what makes this claim so believable. I know you asked us not to ask you, but I'm going to anyway.

I agree with armlx about not liking choatic_diablo's Post 140. I get the sense that it he could be scum giving himself an out if he needs to bus his scum buddy depending on the number of votes at deadline.

Mod edit
Votecount:
Rigel (3): DeanWinchester, opie, armlx
Dean Winchester (2): aioqwe, Sarcastro
Andersonw (1): Rigel
chaotic_diablo (1): ZONEACE

Not voting (4): springlullaby, skitzer, andersonw, chaotic_diablo

With 11 alive it's 6 to lynch. Deadline: March 19

[opie]

[quote="

In Post 184

chaotic_diablo]While it sounds alright, the main problem is that a "safe-claim" has the purpose of telling us that the roles are just that, "black and white". Hitler is bad, Ghandi is good. Otherwise there is no point in having a "safe-claim".[/quote]I am not sure how you arrived at this conclusion. For me a safe claim is provided to prevent mass claims. Scum can be sure that no one else will have the role or the character in their safe claim. That's what makes it safe. They can claim if forced and not be legitimately countered. I'm not sure why safe claim's have to be black and white.

[opie]

First off I'm not so sure that chaotic_diablo self-voting is much of a scum_tell.

However, what I do find suspicious is that he starts a bandwagon in Post 63. Then gives it some legs with some legitimate suspicions and defends the wagon in Posts 65, 67, 72, and 101. He rides the wagon until critical mass (until Rigel is forced to claim). Then backs off because of a vanilla townie claim. Saying that it seems believable but is still suspicious and then that he never believed it. Then adds his vote at the last minute to a wagon he thinks is strange.

He drove the wagon and then says he didn't like who got on board. It seems that he was setting up a lynch for Day Two of someone on the Rigel wagon whilst distancing himself from responsibility of a wagon that he started. On top of which he doesn't explain why he feels that the wagon is strange rather says he will wait. Very suspicious. Very scummy.

Vote: chaotic_diablo

With regards to my comments about in Post 150 regarding chaotic_diablo, that vote made me feel that there might be a possibility that he and Rigel could be a scum and started a fight to put some distance between the two. However, there was little activity in the game and that case ended up being the most substantial case made. At the time of Post 140 Rigel had 4 votes: chaotic_diablo, DeanWinchester,opie,armlx.

The next was DeanWinchester with 2 votes: aioqwe; Sarcastro.

By unvoting chaotic_diablo brought the vote count down to only three, just one more than DeanWinchester. I felt like you wanted to get off the wagon, try to divert focus on someone else, but if unable to do so, left yourself an opportunity of jump back on Rigel if his lynch was inevitable due to the deadline. That is what I was thinking when I posted that.

[opie]

skitzer, what is suspicious about ZONEACE and DeanWinchester place in the lynch?

[opie]

Hey guys, sorry about the lack of activity.

aioqwe, I have been really off base most of this game. I need to re-read and reestablish my bearings in this game. The problem with this game is the lack of inactivity (and I am including myself) its hasn't provided a lot of revealing information. But I definitely think that skitzer gives us a launching point.