Mafia 103 - Ktown Mafia (Game Over)

[Rhinox]

Hello everyone. Just read the whole thread up to this point. Lot to take in all at once, so its kinda just stewing in my head right now and I haven't formed any concrete opinions yet. That'll change as I move along in real time with the thread.

Some things did stick out... one thing that stuck out to me but never received any comments or follow up was the following:

Ok. I'll bite and answer these questions,

hopefully to prove I am not mafia.

There is something wrong with this, but I can't figure out what it is.

I don't like this comment by wiked. It basically translates too, "I feel like this comment can later be used to help mislynch Katniss, so I want there to be something wrong with it, but I can't think of anything good right now so I'll be extremely vague about it and keep it as an option for later on".

Wiked, what I'm wondering is, why make this comment and not pursue what makes you feel there is something wrong with it?

Similarly, I don't think your issues with squirrel were ever resolved either, and somehow he fell from being voted by you to "unsure, but have minor suspicions" and I don't recall anything squirell said that would justify the relative drop in squirrels (well, I guess that is me now) suspicion level. Care to clarify?

unvote

if I have any carryover votes from squirrel

*sniff sniff*

something wiked fouls the air...

vote: wiked

[Rhinox]

If I wanted to use it later, why would I have said anything about it at all?

Its not really my place to speculate and WIFOM reasons why scum do what they do, but since you asked, possibly to show that you had a problem with the comment when it was made, and not having to go back to it later saying "I had a problem with this comment before but I didn't say anything until now".

How do you know that a Katniss lynch would be a mislynch?

I don't. I figured it was obvious that I was considering the 'you as hypo scum' scenario. Or is this going to be one of those games where every post has to have a disclaimer to avoid being sidetracked by technicalities?

I was having trouble explaining why the comment from Katniss bothered me. Scott ended up saying something similar to what I was thinking. Speaking of which, why don't you have any problems with Scott's comment regarding it?

Actually, scott provided reasons for why he didn't like the comment, and went on to vote Katniss, so no, I do not have a problem with scotts comments. This all happened in post 225. Your post didn't occur until after scotts post in post 242. Since you posted after scott, and you are now saying that what scott said is basically what you were feeling, why did you say in post 242 that you could not figure out why you didn't like katniss' post? There is a big glaring inconsistency here.

IMO, this really looks like you were gently feeling out the prospect of a Katniss lynch by your comment in 242. When discussion moved on and nothing really came of it, you didn't feel any need to follow up.

Also, do you actually think I would have gotten away with getting Katniss lynched for that comment?

Not for that comment alone, no. But scott presented a case that had other points besides that comment, and had a bandwagon formed, it seems like you were in good position to use that comment for jumping on the wagon.

I wasn't exactly sure how to explain my problem with it. Thanks for reminding about it though, because I had completely forgotten about it. Don't you see a problem with Katniss having a motivation to not look like mafia?

Your exact words were that you "couldn't figure out what was wrong" with katniss' comment, not that you couldn't explain it. I point that out because I see you changed the wording and I believe there is a clear distinction between the two... 1 is saying you think there is something wrong, you just don't know what, and the other is saying you know there is something wrong, you just can't put it into words. Regardless, see above for why it doesn't make sense, whether you didn't know or couldn't explain, based on the fact that scott posted his comments before you and you say scott basically said what you were feeling.

Regarding Katniss' comment itself, I like how you word "Don't you see a problem..." like there is a problem there I would be foolish not to see. There is no problem. Mafia have a motivation to not look like mafia. Town have a motivation to not look like mafia. It is not helpful to anyones win condition (except for a jester) to look like mafia. That being said, its not very tactful to announce that you're only doing something to try to prove your not mafia. But then again, what motivation does a mafia player have to announce that they're only doing something to not look like mafia? So its a null tell. I'm much more interested in those that think the comment is scummy.

First of all, it was very early in the game, so I didn't see any better alternatives at the time. The person I had previously been voting wasn't
posting. Also, my vote for him was mainly for pressure and to get a better read on him. I did think his actions were suspicious, but I wasn't exactly sure he was scum. That is why I voted him. I have had previous experiences with players making terrible cases against me and flipping town. It has made me more careful. However, not only did I believe my case on CrueKnight was better, but regardless of my read on Mr. Squirrel, I would have switched my vote. That is because it served no purpose when he wasn't even there to respond or defend himself.

This makes a lot of sense.

Interesting. So Rhinox comes and makes a case against me for;

-Having problems with a quote, but being unable to explain why.
-Changing my read on Mr. Squirrel to having minor suspicions, when I had been previously voting him.


So, Rhinox comes and makes a post that is only directed at me, and involves voting me for just two minor/bad reasons. I'm going to move Rhinox/Mr. Squirrel to the "People That May be Good Lynch Choices" category. I have learned to be careful when players make bad cases against me, but both a player and their replacement doing it makes me rethink things.

There we go with that "expain" word thrown in there again... Its moot though because you already said scotts post was pretty much what you were feeling, so in reality you did both know and could explain what you felt was wrong with katniss' post.

Also, why does me voting you make me more lynchable, other than the typical OMGUS reaction? A crappy case is a crappy case, but I haven't yet seen any good reasons to show me I'm off the mark here just yet.

And if you think about it, it makes perfect sense for my first course of action in the game to be following up on squirrel's suspicions... I have the added knowledge of knowing squirrel's allignment and that his comments were genuine.

[Rhinox]

Haylen:

Lies.

I had a discussion with Wicked about the RVS, which counts as game relevent, and then I did a bit of ridiculous scumhunting too. I'm also right in the middle of a discussion with you about my ''non-participation''. Stop trying to go for an easy lynch >=(

Why do you consider yourself an easy lynch? Why should a lynch not be pursued if it were easy? Example: suppose a mod confirmed sane cop reported a guilty on someone, I would call that an easy lynch... are you saying we should ignore the easy lynch and try to find scum elsewhere?

CrueKnight:

Why did you unvote someone midway through the RVS and vote yourself? Why do you hate being in the spotlight at the beginning?

cruelty:

I find you questionable WJ, I'd vote you but I'm uneasy about pushing a wagon this early. So you just get FoSed. Also your enormous posts with heaps of empty space are very irritating to scroll through for very little content. More conciseness please.

Why were you uneasy about pushing the WJ wagon so early? Do you believe an FOS has any utility at all?

You say you don't want Haylen to coast by on smiles and facepalms... do you think that is better or worse than coasting by with nothing at all? Do you think it would be in hypo-scum Haylens best interest to active lurk (which clearly catches your attention) as opposed to full on lurking, which you seem to view as less scummy?

Furry: nothing sticks out after an iso-read. Carry on.

WarWound: You wanted in the game so bad you signed up as a replacement right away. Why are you lurking instead of playing?

Scott: content seems good and productive, but it would be nice if we got more than 1 or 2 of those posts every 3 days.

Malp: looking forward to some good content tomorrow when you return.

~Vigalante~: no posts yet? thoughts on the game?

SolemnJ:

Also, I still don't see what CrueKnight's voting habits were as a valid scumtell. But its worth a finger of suspicion.

If CK's voting habits weren't a valid scumtell IYO, why is it FOS worthy?

On last thursday, you said you would post a case on furry later when you had more time. The next day, you go on to attack and vote Haylen... what happen to your furry case? Did haylen become the more convenient attack? Then on tuesday you switch your vote to furry using new information as justification... what happened to your previous case you had planned to roll out against furry?

Also, your reason for voting furry is crap. Its clear to me that what furry is saying is that if you vote for someone, you better be prepared to take responsibity (or credit, depending) if that player is lynched while you're voting for them, whether you initially voted them because you were unsure about them and wanted to pressure for reactions, or whether you thought they were scum. Voting to lynch and voting for pressure are not mutually exclusive. All votes are to lynch.

DeathNote: You say you are lost... Anything in particular you would like explained in a more concise way?

Torqez: moar input needed.

VistaSoldier: ditto.

Katniss: Nothing I've read jumps out at me.

Wiked: just awaiting a response to my previous post.

don't think I missed anyone...


Just my thoughts on the game so far, some questions I'd like answered. I'm pretty much all caught up and up to speed now with whats going on.

[Rhinox]

K. I'm going make a post, any post after this one I'm going to consider a simulpost.

2.5 hours later... this is going to be one hell of a long post!

[Rhinox]

unvote

I still think I made a good point, but I can't come to the conclusion that you are scum based on that one point alone, and I don't want to turn this into a distracting quote war nobody can win.

The Katniss comment is still a null tell. Townies have a collective goal of catching scum, and one way to help the town do that is to not sidetrack the town into thinking your scum when you have the inside knowledge of knowing you're not. If Katniss showed a consistent record of only defending and trying not to look scummy, that would be one thing, but one comment saying he wants to "hopefully prove he's not scum" is not "devoting his time trying to look pro-town". Katniss has appeared to be scumhunting in this game, as far as I can tell.

I'm not ignoring scott, but he made it clear why he didn't like Katniss' comment, and also voted katniss for other reasons that didn't include the comment. I have no problem with people supporting their cases with a vote if they provide sound reasoning, even if I don't agree with them.

Arguing that the case on you is bad is not much of an argument, but I'll play along. Suppose you're right and the case on you is the worst possible case... is town or scum more likely to make a bad case? Would you rather players sit back and not present cases at all until there is a good case? Can there ever be a good case that way?

I guess it was more convenient to attack Haylen.

I expected my old Furry attack to fail.
Also, Rhinox, I disagree with what you said about my new attack on furry; if he turns out to be town, I'll get myself an avatar.

The reason that I thought CK only deserved an FoS at the time was because it was possible CrueKnight had just made a towniemistake.

interesting...

What was your old furry case and why did you expect it to fail? What made attacking Haylen more convenient?

Can you sum up your new attack on Furry? maybe there is something I mised?

Hmmmm...

Now...question: why does Furry have so many votes on him?
-----------------------------------------------------------
Precisely; I'm wondering why Furry has so many votes on him.

I suspect Furry, and will post why when I get time.
---------------------------------------------------
I'll post my attack on Furry later on when I have enough/more time...

In the interim, you argued with ck and scott, and did not mention furry once... what changed?

Sorry, my building was on fire. I've been standing outside in the cold for the last hour and a half while come fire engines came to sort it out. I've writing half the post though. (My posts dont tend to be long, im just a very slow typer.)

Now now, you don't have to go making stuff up to get off the hook...

just joking. The power cuts out in my building at least once a month, so I could be in the same situation some day.

[Rhinox]

1. I thought RVSs was the joking stage, so I was messing around. A vote doesn't count unless there is a reason for it. And I didn't have a reason. (For who vote without a reason should get FoSs on them)

I don't really like self votes at all, because even in the RVS (which doesn't really exist, btw), you should always vote for players you think are scum and be willing to take responsibility for the lynch if it occurs with your vote there. For that reason, no townie should ever vote themselves because that is the one player in the game that you know 100% is not scum. So by voting yourself, you're intentionally going against your own win condition, even if its only for a joke (its not funny at all, anyways). I realize Halyen self-voted too, but your self vote was worse because you unvoted someone else to self vote, which sends a message that you believe you are more likely to be scum than the person you unvoted. Self voting is also just as bad as not voting early in the game if not worse, because you are not pressure people, bandwagoning, or establishing a voting record that may be used for analysis later in the game. The only thing it does is put you in the spolight for it (which can technically ends the RVS, so its not always a bad thing) which is what you said you hated. So, in other words, its stupid, poinless, unhelpful, and unfunny to self vote. Ever. [/soapbox]

2. Because out of experience, it usually gets me killed early on the game. I either get killed by a scummie that is claiming a Vig or something and excuses himself because I looked scummie. Or I claim something important and and of coarse die because the mafia wishes to rid of me.

Low profile games usually keep me alive... well, I only won one mafia game in like 12 games so far so I guess I'm a natural scummie player. :p

Not a very good answer... but I don't think its something scum would say either...


@Haylen: how's that post coming along? Why don't you just post the first half since you say its done and you can add in the second half when you get around to it?

Laziness is a scum tell.

Why?

I don't have a read due to so much wording. I am so lost...

hear hear -_-

What are you lost about? If you're so unclear you can't comment on anything, ask questions to try to become more clear. simply posting that you're lost only shows that you didn't read the thread or you don't care.

Torqez and Deathnote: Why are you both currently voting someone if you're both lost and have no idea whats going on? Support your votes.

My old furry case was based on his reason for voting me in the first place.
The reason I voted for Haylen and thought it more convenient was b/c she had more attention and seemed more scummy.
My suspicioun on Furry is fueled partially by a sixth sense.

So, it was basically just OMGUS, then?

What did Haylen say that made her seem scummier?

Do you realize that going with the popular vote solely because its popular is sort of a scummy way to play?

[Rhinox]

What did Haylen say that made her seem scummier?

[Rhinox]

ok... makes sense.

Where is everyone? I still have other questions needing answers.

[Rhinox]

Missed this post somehow...

Laziness is a scum tell.

Why?

A lazy player is not a scum-hunting player.

good point.

--------------------------

I voted for you in support of Scott's accusation.

I think he was talking about furry there, not you.

[Rhinox]

<snip>

Arguing that the case on you is bad is not much of an argument, but I'll play along. Suppose you're right and the case on you is the worst possible case... is town or scum more likely to make a bad case?

Scum.

Would you rather players sit back and not present cases at all until there is a good case?

Yes. There is no point spending the whole game making bad cases. Especially this late in the game.

Can there ever be a good case that way?

Yes. I believe I have made good cases this game. Such as my cases against VistaSoldier and CrueKnight.

<snip>

Does anybody want to comment on my vote for VistaSoldier?

I disagree with you at the fundamental theory level, but I see no reason to continue because I do not beleive your answers are scummy. Unless you want me to directly respond...

On your vote on vistasoldier: meh... not really a strong enough case to lynch his replacement on.


This game needs more Haylen

[Rhinox]

Hi Faraday welcome to the fun.

Status: Day 1
Deadline: November 25, ~ 8:30 am MST

didn't realize we were under deadline... not yet impending, but it certainly changes things.

[Rhinox]

actually... its 6 days I think... unless I forgot how to count. so about a week.

[Rhinox]

foilist13 replaces VistaSoldier. Thanks Faraday and foilist13!

Wait weren't you lynched already???

oh.. wrong game

welcome enjoy the read

[Rhinox]

cruelty:

I find you questionable WJ, I'd vote you but I'm uneasy about pushing a wagon this early. So you just get FoSed. Also your enormous posts with heaps of empty space are very irritating to scroll through for very little content. More conciseness please.

Why were you uneasy about pushing the WJ wagon so early? Do you believe an FOS has any utility at all?

Still would like an answer to this.

-----------------------------------------

Ok, I'm still on page 7, so this has probably already been addressed, but wicked looks ridiculous. I'm not sure what the purpose of his anti-rvs questioning was, but it certainly wasn't scumhunting.

Random questioning is a valid alternative to random voting.

See Mini 783 and this thread.

----------------------------------------

vote: Haylen

Answer my questions in this post...

and get on with the content filled post you promised here...

at least post the first half of it since you claim its already written in the post...

or die for lying.

[Rhinox]

FYI... the origin of the chainsaw defense.

crueknight: were you seriously asking about whether you should claim here?

[Rhinox]

Got the prod - I'm around - will post more later.

I don't have a read due to so much wording. I am so lost...

hear hear -_-

-_-

Last 3 posts over 6 days. This is unacceptable heading into a deadline.

Haylen... post. please. post whatever you have of your 3 analysis posts you claim to be working on.

[Rhinox]

FYI: I will be on limited access until possibly next saturday.

I hope to be able to make brief posts between now and then. I'll be back home in PA trying to shoot me a deer. If all goes to plan I'll get one tomorrow and call it a week, but I have until next saturday blocked off for hunting if I need it.

I should be able to post something substantial later today once I get back to PA. One thing that makes me curious is why is furry so strongly defending ck as if he knows he's town... this was going on yesterday as well. I can understand saying that there isn't enough evidence to support ck being scum, but I certainly wouldn't call him town enough to avidly defend against his lynch. This sorta reeks of hypo-scum furry wanting to get town cred for trying to prevent a townie mislynch.

vote: furry

V/LA is noted

[Rhinox]

Just posting to say that my limited access ended up being no access at all, but starting tomorrow I'll be back to full access. All I have time for right now is to say that I haven't read anything since my last post and I don't have time to do it right now - have to travel from PA back to Ohio, but I'll jump right back to full activity tomorrow.

[Rhinox]

Alright, I'm back and all caught up. First off,

unvote furry

. Still don't agree with defending other players even if you think they're town, but I don't think this makes furry scum. I guess this means we'll be putting up with the fuzzy handcuffs a little longer...

vote: malpascp

Out of all the people who voted Haylen, malps vote looks the worst in iso. I think there is for sure at least one scum who was on the haylen wagon and I think malp might be one. Reading him in iso, almost every time he posts, he is changing his vote. His votes don't have strong reasoning, and the votes are never followed up on. It is clear this is a player entirely uninterested in scum hunting, but wanting to look like he is participating.

cruelty, could your suspicion of malpascp be summarized as not contributing much?

Rhinox, what do you think of cruelty?

Why do you ask? I don't see anything I'd consider scummy at the moment, and I think he's been making some good points.

[Rhinox]

What did you think of posts 548-550? Also, I asked, because I was beginning to suspect him.

I think there is some interesting stuff there, but its meh as far as a case goes.

Why would you vote him for not contributing after we lynched a townie for that same reason?

This is non-sequitor.

The stuff about cruelty saying he doesn't necessarily want a haylen lynch but voting to lynch her anyways is the most interesting part, but its weak. I think cruelty has done a god job of explaining it already. I interpretted his vote first as a pressure vote, which later turned into a desire to lynch after haylen failed to deliver.

BTW, Faraday and Rhinox also need to explain themselves.

What exactly is it that I need to explain?

1: So scum is ALWAYS anti-town? 2: Or would you concede that occasionally their survival becomes more important than bringing down town?

1: Where the heck did I say that? Stop twisting my words scum.

2: This has absolutely nothing to do with my survival. I wasn't even on the chopping block Day 1. Quit imagining.

umm... pretty obvious here that cruelty was talking about some annonomous hypo-scum... why do you answer in #2 as if you are the hypo scum he was talking about?



I think this whole back and forth between wicked and cruelty is distracting from what we should actually be doing right now: lynching malp.

[Rhinox]

@Rhinox - If we assume there is at least one scum on the Haylen wagon, why are you limiting yourself to just Malp? He looks the scummiest to you obviously, but shouldn't you expand that to at least two or three suspects? Perhaps you should go through the wagon and decide who you think is town to narrow the list. I am interested in who you might come up with as the most likely scum candidates.

I'm not limiting myself to just malp, sorry if I gave that impression. I looked at how and when everyone jumped on the haylen wagon in context with the rest of their play and proximity to deadline to come up with my conclusion that I believe malp is most likely to be scum. I've already gone through the wagon and decided who I think is town, but I don't think its best play to announce all and every town read, as that just gives information to the mafia. I of course have other suspects, I just beleive its better to focus on the player you want lynched rather than trying to argue 2 or 3 cases at a time. That doesn't mean I won't question other players or look for other scum.

If I haven't made myself clear, I'm not getting the impression that either cruelty and wicked are scum based on their current exchange. Cruelty is making sound, rational arguments, I just don't agree that what he's arguing makes wicked scum. If you look back at wicked day 1, he became suspiscious of anyone who voiced suspicions of him, so his offense against cruelty is right in line with that. I view that up to now as a town tell, but of course now that I've mentioned that, any future occurances become null.

So I think its time we move on and hear more from and about other players.

[Rhinox]

I find it interesting that the only people who would seem to want Scott brosius dead are CrueKnight and Furry. Scott Brosius only posted a couple of times. So actually...

unvote
vote:CrueKnight

Welcome to the game and glad to see you jumping right in with some content!

That is a very interesting theory, but a question you need to ask yourself is that if crueknight and/or furry are scum and thought they could get scott lynched, why would they waste a nk on him?

Another thing I will point out is that its nearly impossible to determine who is scum based on who is nked, because the scum can be manipulating based on what they think we would think about who was nked. This is otherwise known as WIFOM.

[Rhinox]

Thanks for getting me started on some strategy, Rhinox. But what if they think we won't be able to figure out who is mafia based on who is nked so they off whoever they feel threatened by?

Thats one of the valid reasons why mafia may choose to kill someone. Do you think crueknight and/or furry had a reason to feel threatened by scott?

[Rhinox]

scott voted for crueknight before dying. he also disputed with furry

That is very interesting. I missed that in my rereads. However, there is another side to it that makes it WIFOM. Hypothetically, maybe you are scum and you killed scott in order to frame crueknight by arguing that crueknight had a reason to feel threatened by scott.

Or maybe the mafia was getting power role vibes from scott.

Or maybe they just rolled a dice.

This is why 99% of the time, you can't really make a solid case based on the previous night's kill.

Also, I wouldn't consider scotts interaction a dispute so much... more like general standard gameplay conversation.

[Rhinox]

I just joined the game as a replacement. how could I have killed scott?

I used "you" as a hypothetical example. It could've been hypothetically anyone who killed scott to frame ck.

Incidentally,the fact that you just replaced in does not eliminate the possiblility that the player you replaced performed the kill, in which case saying that you killed sclott would in fact be valid.

--------------------------------------------------------

@SolemnJ: what do you mean by "Bussing a scumpal?" Who is bussing a scumpal and why?

--------------------------------------------------------

I will, don't worry. I'll give him the wall post he deserves before I put my vote on him.

I'd rather this post come sooner rather than later. I realize its still more than a week to deadline, but the pace this game has slowed to means we're going to need a lot of time to discuss. Furthermore, if a case takes this long to get out and fills a wall of text, its probably not as solid as you think. The surest I've ever been of scum have been the times its only taken 1 paragraph to explain why.

P.S. Why aren't we lynching malp yet?

[Rhinox]

Malpa's playing like he did in my modded game where he was scum, little activity, doing nothing etc.

Okay early thoughts.

LURKERS = BAD. Malpascp should have been lynched with a fucking vengeance IMO.

well?

also,

Also I enjoyed modding this game, hope to play games with all of you (except mapascp ) in the future too.

lulz

Is the case on him anything apart from his VI'ness?

Actaully, yeah. When I look at his posts in iso, I don't see a lurker. I see a player trying to look like he's scumhunting while not actually doing it at all. 6 out of his 9 posts change his voting status. Thats the "trying to look like he's scum hunting" part. none of his posts follow up on any of his votes. Thats the "not actually scumhunting at all" part.

[Rhinox]

Response to 599:

Its a non-sequitor because you can't form an argument that players who are non-contributing are likely to be town based on the single occurance of 1 town non-contributing player.

1: Why you voted malpascp for doing something that a townie did that we lynched.
------------------------------------
2: When has non-contribution every been a good reason to lynch somebody? It's not even a strong scum tell. In fact, on this site, I bet it happens more often with town.

1: Wait I thought you just said that haylen was lynched for her excuses and not her non-contribution? I don't recall voting malp for neither excuses nor non-contribution...

2: Please direct me to where I said I was voting malp for non-contribution...

Why are you misrepping the reasons for my desire to lynch malp?

Regarding cruelty, idk maybe I'm just dense but I just don't see it as damning as you are making it out to be. I assume this is the paragraph you are taking issue with?

I started the Haylen wagon, and my final post before the deadline was confirmation that I was happy with it. That post was 14 hours before the day was closed. Not really sure how this is a valid point, you're attacking me for being happy with my vote on a wagon that I started and continually advocated? I mean, I was wrong about her alignment but this is a ludicrous attempt to incriminate me.

And in post 599, if I understand correctly, you're taking issue with cruelty claiming to have started the wagon when the reason haylen was lynched was not his own reason? Okay, well its interesting, but I don't see it as big of a deal as you're making it out to be. I don't see this as cruelty attempting to say that he took a strong stand on the haylen wagon, I interpret this as cruelty's response to your accusation that he kept his vote on haylen after he expressed a desire not to have her lynched. As I said before, my reread of cruelty's posts and cruelty's response say the same thing - that he started out only wanting to pressure haylen, and the pressure turned into a satisfaction with the lynch when Haylen failed to deliver. I don't see it as any more than that.

For the record, I view cruelty's main point against you as more damning than your point against him - that you voted for the ck bandwagon rather than any one of your top 3 suspects. But I also accept your response - that it was nearly deadline and you wanted to put your vote on one of the top 2 wagons. I disagree with cruelty's point that you chose ck somehow knowing that it wouldn't lead to a lynch, or that you wanted to buddy with anyone as a result.

So really, I don't want to lynch either of you today based on the information we have.

-----------------------------------------------------------

My vote is currently on one of them [lurker], in Torquez/his replacement. Since that seems to be going no where despite his utter lack of contribution..

And yeh, my face was a picture when I saw him in this game


Unvote Vote Malpascp

yay bandwagon gogogo! :arrow:

Did you happen to find any games where malp was town to meta him?

Is this fucking serious? So b/c ONE townie does it, it means it's not scummy? Really Wicked? Oh god this is unbelievably bad.

I was trying to go about it a little more subtle than this

[Rhinox]

I'm still here, just watching, waiting.

What are you waiting for?

----------------------------------------------------

@cruelty:

eh... maybe... idk... when wicked voted ck, ck and haylens wagon's were tied at 3 a piece, so wicked's vote actually made CK the leading wagon. He couldn't have predicted that haylen's would lead to a lynch while ck's would not, especially considering that the next 2 votes were from a replacement (the inquisition) who hadn't yet given any clues to whom he might vote, and foilist, who jumped on the wagon: "Well in the interests of the approaching deadline, I'm going to go ahead and pick a wagon." There was really no indication before the votes came in that inquisition and foilist would be voting haylen, so I just don't believe at the time wicked voted ck (making ck the temporary largest wagon), he had the forsight to predict that ck's wagon would fail to lynch and haylens would progress to lynch. It really wasn't until after inquisition's and foilist's vote that haylen really dug herself a hole with the emotional appeals, making her the certain lynch choice.

cruelty: what is the difference between wicked's vote on ck and foilist's vote on haylen "picking a wagon in the interest of the approaching deadline"?

wicked: why was crueknight a better lynch choice yesterday than haylen, ignoring the obvious now known fact that haylen was town?

Why aren't you today pursuing your top 3 suspects from yesterday: foilist, Furry, and Katniss/Cades?

----------------------------------------------

Furry: between wicked and cruelty, do either give you the conviction that they are more likely scum?


After rereading, I've also come to the conclusion that whoever the scum are, they aren't exactly the brightest lot... more on this later in the game if/when a certain event happens.

[Rhinox]

@SolemnJ: what do you mean by "Bussing a scumpal?" Who is bussing a scumpal and why?

The lack of activity in this game is very frustrating. Just because there is a deadline does not mean we have to wait for the deadline to come before we do anything.

[Rhinox]

You don't stop scum hunting just because you've placed your vote on one player you think is scum. You can still question other players. encouraging others to vote is a good start.

mod: any news on whether any of our inactives will be replaced?

[Rhinox]

@SolemnJ: what do you mean by "Bussing a scumpal?" Who is bussing a scumpal and why?

The lack of activity in this game is very frustrating. Just because there is a deadline does not mean we have to wait for the deadline to come before we do anything.

i answered that.

oh... is this the answer?

Bussing a scumpal?

vote CrueKnight

What are you talking about? And it that reason alone you are voting for me? Please elaborate on that.

I've been attacking you for a while.

Your post about your suspicions against Furry about him "being on the top of your list" for "no particular reason" really interested me.

If so, its very weak and I don't see it. I don't see this as showing how they are scum together. I don't like you calling something bussing when the allignment or both players in unknown. Why vote ck and not furry if they're both scum? edit: you've already answered this, but I still don't like the pairing and potential lining up of lynches, especially because I don't really think either of them are scum.

Gah. When I said "12 players or less" I mean 12 players total, not 12 players still alive! You've tricked me Kdub!

Ah, well. I can still work with this. Not *too* big. I'll start digging into this during the weekend.

welcome.

Rhinox, what exactly made malpascp's vote the worst?

He stated Haylen's claim was false without giving any reasons why. He never before then talked about haylen at all. And I don't get what this comment was supposed to mean at all:

Unless someone think vanilla can claim doc, I sugest to lynch her.

The last quote in your post #633 should be attributed to danakillsu, not me.

im making a thread in mafia discussion about lynching for non-contribution after this is all over.

Search for "Lynch all lurkers", the post is already there.

[Rhinox]

Deadline is December 19, ~11:00 am MST

We're now 5 days from deadline. The pace this game is going, we should probably plan on coming to an initial decision within the next day or 2 to make sure we don't have any surprise deadline claims and bad decisions as a result. We would be better off if we weren't rushing to make a decision on friday/saturday morning.

I don't really like dana and faraday posting for the sake of posting.

I'm glad to see malp's replacement is active, but I'm less than satisfied with the content. kunkstar, you think wicked is scummy, so why did you unvote instead of voting wicked? How do you think that more time is going to help you form a basis for a vote if you don't question anyone? And before you say you asked a question to wicked, it doesn't count because if you'd have read the thread, you'd have seen that question has been answered more than once. Also, why did you only choose to mention wicked, cades, furry, and sir chris in your analysis post? there are 7 other players in the game.

[Rhinox]

Rhinox, where did you give your reasons for your Haylen vote, and was Sir Chris's vote for Haylen better than malpascp's?

I never really spelled out exactly my reasons for voting haylen, nor for why my vote remained on haylen.

yes, sir chris' vote was better. Sir chris wanted haylen to claim here, here, and here. He felt haylen was stalling, and this post appears to be the breaking point. He unvoted after haylen claimed, and revoted after the argument was brought up about haylen's claiming tendencies as scum. I can logically follow the path that led chris to voting haylen, and I can not form an argument that the path is scummy.

[Rhinox]

Alright, time to take charge. If we want to wring somebody up, allow ample time for a claim, then decide whether or not to postpone the lynch we had better hurry. I propose we state our top three candidates. Deadline is Saturday at 11, so in the next 48 hours (by Thursday) I would like everyone to follow suit. We'll take the top two candidates with the most psuedo-votes and split our final votes among them.

If everyone who was not voting would vote, we would be just as well off. I'm generally not a fan of lists such as "top 3 choices". I like my vote on kunk. I'm not sure I have seen anything conclusive in any other direction, but I would support other wagons to ensure there is a lynch over a no-lynch. The only player I feel adamantly against lynching today would be furry.

So, what made your vote better than malpascp's?

Timing and intent. What does my vote has to do with what I can divine from looking into other players votes on the wagon?

Re-reading through the thread I'd say wicked isn't on top of my list. There are a few I can pinch at... but Wicked is on my suspect list.

I don't like the vague-ness of this statement. Who is on the top of your list? Who are the "few" you referred to?

@cruelty: how is it protown to defer the lynch of a player you think is scum to a player you think is useless? scum should trump useless, imo.

cades is lurking in all his mafias...let him get replaced instead.

+1

@faraday: do you have any scum reads?

[Rhinox]

Not Voting (3) - cades, CrueKnight, SolemnJ

I expect 2 of you to be voting right now. why aren't you?

[Rhinox]

Rhinox why are you voting kunk and not wicked? This confuses me.

I am voting kunk because of an analysis of the haylen lynch wagon - I'm sure there's at least one scum on it, and malp's jump onto the wagon seemed most scum-like.

I am not voting wicked because I'm not convinced the main point against him is a scum tell. but if it comes down to a deadline decision of wicked or no lynch, I would rather see wicked lynched. Just because I'm not convinced he's scum doesn't mean I think he's town.

[Rhinox]

Just want to let everyone know that I am probably not going to be available to post tomorrow afternoon as we head into deadline - I'm going to be at a christmas party in my hometown back in PA from 3PM til whenever it gets done, which very well could be late in the evening.

I'm just letting everyone know because we currently seem to have 3 potential lynches today (cades, kunk, or wicked), and tomorrow morning before I leave for home might be the last chance I'll have to consider switching my vote before deadline.

unvote

I'm not sure I want to lynch kunk anymore.

[Rhinox]

not liking solemnj lately ftr. feels off.

i'm happy w/

wicked

or cades being lynched. I'll switch to avoid a NL obv. Against a

wicked

lynch as I think he's town.

wanna try this line again?

[Rhinox]

where is MBF by the way...

[Rhinox]

Wicked...post something.

are you following along?

wicked clearly said here that he would be unable to post for the rest of the day...

incidentally, I have about an hour of posting time left. I'll be placing my final vote for the day before I leave. I would hope to hear a little more discussion first.

[Rhinox]

this feels like such a crapshoot...

Wicked just doesn't feel like scum to me... I think is attack on cruelty was crap, but he was trying too hard for it to be scum driven imo. after getting attacked for picking a wagon not in his top 3 yesterday, it doesn't seem like scum-wicked under pressure would do the same today.

The only thing I have against kunk is malps vote on the haylen wagon, which is admittedly weak on its own. I've pushed it all day because I was hoping for something else to come out of it. The lack of any other support makes me think I'm wrong.

cades could very well be replaced, but at this point I'm thinking that lynching him as a utility lynch might not be the worst idea. I just don't really believe in any option at this point.

I'm starting to think we've been looking in the wrong directions, but those directions will have to be explored tomorrow...

vote: cades

This will probably be my last post of the day...

[Rhinox]

Surprise, I get to post again...

cades could very well be replaced, but at this point I'm thinking that lynching him as a utility lynch might not be the worst idea. I just don't really believe in any option at this point.

vote: cades

Why is it better to lynch Cades than to no lynch?

cades lynch has a chance at hitting scum. No lynch has no chance at hitting scum. suggesting a no lynch just because we can't come to a consensus is scummy.

sir chris is making a lot of sense.

[Rhinox]

If I am making a lot of sense can you switch your vote to wicked because that'd just make my day.

how would you feel about a solemnJ lynch?

[Rhinox]

bah... I gotta go... wife is mad...

unvote vote wicked

[Rhinox]

lol gg scum.

Good thing you killed me. I had all 3 of you nailed in the Dead player's quick topic.

[Rhinox]

Thanks for posting that Rhinox, I completely forgot.

np. I figured no one would mind, and I wanted to brag a little to make myself feel better about the loss

[Rhinox]

I was planning on claiming JK if there was no doctor flip, however that once forced me back to RB. There were a few situations where I put my crumbs much stronger to JK then RB, and im glad no one took the time to go point those out.

Did you read the deadplayer QT? You should be very glad I wasn't around long enough to see the doc come out. I think I pointed out every single one of your crumbs. I honestly can't believe nobody else noticed them.

Remember this comment I made early on in the game?

Alright, I'm back and all caught up. First off, unvote furry. Still don't agree with defending other players even if you think they're town, but I don't think this makes furry scum. I guess this means we'll be putting up with the fuzzy handcuffs a little longer...

This was the point where I realized you were crumbing jk. At that point, I I flipped my view to not wanting to lynch you because I believed you were being honest.

I made this comment to try to get people to go back and reread the thread to find your crumbs:

After rereading, I've also come to the conclusion that whoever the scum are, they aren't exactly the brightest lot... more on this later in the game if/when a certain event happens.

Remember when I asked you this? Notice the key word I bolded and how it could apply to a jailer.

Furry: between wicked and cruelty, do either give you the

conviction

that they are more likely scum?

I saw your crumbs that you were considering targeting either wicked or cruelty, and I was trying to get a feel from you which one you targetted. You gave an ambiguous answer that would have allowed you to claim either as a target later on, and that is the point where I started suspecting you were lying and setting up a fake claim.

When the doc came out, you'd have pretty much been done for if I were alive. I dont know if I were alive I'd have been able to get both MBF/MME and DJ lynched, but I called them both as scum by the start of the day after I was nked, and nothing in the rest of the game ever made me reconsider.

So furry, what I'm trying to say is I sure hope you don't require that account, because I would LOVE to have a rematch sometime. Nothing worse than sitting on the sideline knowing who's scum but not in the game to be able to do anything about it.