Some thoughts on the game so far:
I understand Toaster Strudel's hostility. I do think MoS's original policy vote was unfair, and unjustified, regardless of what other games are ongoing. Quagmire's joining in that policy vote was also apparently based on personal hostility and not on alignment.
MoS has a recurring pattern of defending certain players who have extremely scummy playstyles. ZONEACE springs to mind, and I think a similar thing is going on here with Quagmire. I find this scummy, but in MoS's case it may well be a nulltell. I simply don't know. That said, this:
Mastermind of Sin wrote:Also, it's a bit more than just a policy lynch. I don't have fun playing in games with people like that any more. But I have fun playing with most of the rest of you, so I'm not about to replace out. Therefore, I am also voting to eliminate the funsucker from this game.
is WAY over the line. I could make similar arguments in this game for lynching Quagmire, and in other games for lynching ZONEACE and other people as well, people that MoS defends tooth and nail. Alignment DOES matter. I happen to have fun playing with Toaster Strudel (at least when she's not being baited and provoked and made angry every second). So just because YOU don't have fun playing with her doesn't have anything to do with her alignment. If other people voted for ZONEACE because he's abusive and he isn't any fun to play with (both things I find to be true) then you'd be screaming bloody murder about how only his ALIGNMENT matters. So that's a pretty hypocritical argument, in my view.
I find Quagmire scummy in this game. I have no meta read, though, and other people are arguing that he always plays like this. I don't see why so many people would vouch for this, if it's not true. They surely ALL can't be scum. MoS is defending Quagmire and Quagmire is trailing MoS's policy lynch. To my mind they're pretty much buddied up as much as possible. That's a risky proposition if MoS is scum with Quagmire, and the more so if Quagmire wasn't aware of that fact, because the two are linked pretty seriously. I think it's more likely that MoS has some strange personal playstyle policy of defending people with extremely scummy playstyles. I don't think this is a wise policy, but I think it explains a lot. And I think it actually makes it less likely that Quagmire and MoS are scum together.
There was no consensus for lynching Quagmire. A consensus can't be forced. I think Toaster Strudel is angry, and I would be too in her place. I think the behaviours exhibited by MoS and Quagmire toward her are horrendous, and that it is very difficult to get past that fact. But Mafia is a game not just of finding scum, but of building consensuses, and as long as some of the players are playing with personal hostility not related to alignment, it's more difficult for ANYTHING to get done.
Some questions I have:
TS, if neither Quagmire nor MoS are scum, who is your next suspect? Do you think Yosarian and hasdgfas are more likely scum if Quagmire does turn out to be town? If you think we need to lynch someone as soon as possible (which I think you've implied) do you think that there is any consensus to lynch Quagmire at this point? Do you find Peers scummy?
Quagmire, do you think that scum often defend town against a likely lynch in an attempt to pick up townie points? Do you think that policy lynches are in general a good thing?
MoS, did you expect Quagmire to jump on your policy vote and try to lynch TS? Did you approve of that once it happened? Do you regret any of the statements you made in that regard?
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
