Open 83 - Polygamist Mafia (Game over!) before 628

[Nameless]

/confirm

[Nameless]

I can think of no good reason NOT to massclaim straight up. Doing so will make the game simpler for the town, whereas not doing so will ... not. Unless there's something I'm missing here.

[Nameless]

I guess that makes sense.

Yeah, massclaim at LyLo-D2 makes sense, I guess...

FOS MafiaSSK, somestrangeflea

for bland agreements. (The bland attempts to follow the town that is, not their actual position on massclaiming)

Personally, I'm not really sure how the voting patterns will be any more informative without claiming. You might catch the mafia out if they were expecting a mass claim (as last game), but the same could apply to townie lovers unsure how to act, meaning there's a greater chance of mislynching. Ultimately massclaiming would mean more information and more surety, which is going to help the town.

[Nameless]

Giving further evidence to support a decision which has already been made is pointless.

If you believed a decision had already been made then your post was pointless - you could have acknowledged it simply by not claiming and beginning to scumhunt.

[Nameless]

if we don't massclaim, then even town pairs might not vote together

Even if we do massclaim, I see no reason why me and my lover should always vote the same way...

For this to work,

all TOWN pairs must

vote together. scums do whatever you want

I agree with somestrangeflea's post. If my lover is an idiot I'm not going to support their voting and I would expect them to do the same to me. If nothing else, assuming you COULD force all town to vote together, that would probably result in a much faster lynching (you'd only need to convince half as many people) which is bad for the town.

NOW I claim to be scum:

If you are scum, I applaud your guts in pulling off such a ridiculous and risky gambit in this particular set up. If you are town you are an IDIOT for adding so many bad ideas, confusion and WIFOM to the game. I pretty much agree with all of the points SpyreX has made.

With that I'll start the mass-claim.

Me and somestrangeflea are lovers

(I know..lol).

based on your join date and your posts

HoS:KNIGHT42

for both not claiming and for your vote post, very scummy

FoS: all non-claimers

I disagree with this ... To me, knight sounds like an newbie, and I'm not sure how his recent join date makes his posts sound more scummy. I still support massclaiming, but the issue was clearly still up for debate and you can't really unclaim once two people have confirmed each other. Casting suspicion at everyone who disagrees with your point of view is ... just stupid.

What a convenient way for you to vote for me without seeming scummy.

Vote:Adel

and no, I am NOT omgusing.

, just .

I don't know what to think anymore....if you are town, you certainly aren't helping us...at all.

This? This is called irony.

If we vote for the scummiest player on D1, then that takes away the whole purpose of having lover pairs, which is suppose to make things easier.

I'm confused. Did you actually just suggest we don't vote for the scummiest player D1?

FACEPALM TOTAL: 8

HoS: Gimbo

Although Gimbo's play is incredibly anti-town, I'm not going to vote yet because even considering WIFOM I find it hard to believe any scum would be that obvious and risky in this setup. (Also, I think we should be careful not to place votes too quickly on anybody to avoid the mafia getting away with a disguised quick lynch.)

[Nameless]

A couple more things:

I support mass-claiming today simply because we known townies wouldn't lie, so we would already have 4 vote-pairs right off the bat, this forces the 4 scum to split, and its much better for town.

if we don't massclaim, then even town pairs might not vote together, thus its going to be much more confusing.

so you voted for SSF during the random voting phase to spread confusion?

unvote, vote:Gimbo

Actually, on second thought, this vote from Adel does seem kind of odd. Out off all the dubious things Gimbo has said Adel chooses this (IMHO, poor) argument to quote when voting? :/

So with all this, I'll say that my partner (who is also my lover )

is

in favour of a claim.

This wording seems unusual and I'm not sure how half-claiming helps either side of the argument.

Gimbo/Nameless scumgroup +1

... Why?

[Nameless]

I can see why you would do a "hos" instead of a vote, and fear of a quicklynch has nothing to do with it.

And now you are beginning to attack people that attacked Gimbo.

Right. The first part of that is interpretation, and I'm not sure what I can say to it but "That's incorrect". As for the second part, I'm just pointing out a few things that don't seem right in other people's posts rather than focusing only on one player.

[Nameless]

If flea withdraws:
A. Both are mafia
B. Flea is mafia, trying to perhaps frame chelsea
C. Is town and = worthless
If he stays
A. Mafia and dumb at the same time
B. Town and innocent thus clearing the likes of gimbo

This logic is highly and obviously flawed, as others have already pointed out. To Knight, do you still honestly believe this is going to clear or damn anyone,

especially

after posting exactly how you (incorrectly) it would do so?

I also

FoS:Nameless

for being on board for pair reveals before Gimbo's gambit, and now avoiding doing so.

I supported the massclaims, but I wasn't going to start doing so while other players believed they could find the mafia easier without doing so ... Not that there's much point now that half the players have already claimed.

For what it's worth, my lover is Firestarter.

[Nameless]

Nameless: In your latest posts, you regurgitated what everyone has already said about Knight.

I only made one sentence (in one post) stating that I agreed with what had been pointed out, as I wished to ask Knight a question related to it. As for Knight's response ... he sounds like a newbie who doesn't really know what he's doing, but (especially the last post) could be an exaggerated act by the mafia. So it wasn't really helpful at all.

In addition, you made it clear that you only claimed your partner because everyone else did and most likely because of the FoS from forbid.In addition you said

Not that there's much point now that half the players have already claimed

... do you mean that if 1/2 the town didn't claim already, there would've been some sort of point in you not revealing your lover? How is that so? Enlighten me please.

I was, and still am, supportive of an early D1 massclaim to help simplify the game. The reason I didn't claim initially was because other players believed there was an advantage not to, and to jump in and start claiming would irreversibly remove that advantage were I wrong; and to a lesser extent it would be, you know, kind of rude when the decision was still up in the air. The reason I claimed when I did was because at the point where half the town had claimed, most of the advantage from nobody doing so would be lost, so regardless of other player's initial plans the other half of the town might as well claim to finish simplifying things.

I don't believe the advantage from avoiding claiming is as great as the advantage from the claiming, but I was willing to give other players the benefit of the doubt until a consensus was reached.

If you were town, I don't see why you would not want to answer this question as the method of play won't be relevant to you in this game.

Hey I've got an even better idea let's

not

publicly discuss strategy for the mafia because - gasp - it will only give the mafia ideas and probably reveal what the town expects of them.

[Nameless]

Well, my partner is gone >sob< and I think Nameless and Firestarter need a wake-up slap.

I think you're overstating my inactivity, but I apologise if I haven't been as active as other players. This is first game I've played in with serious activity happening and I'm finding it hard to keep up, let alone comment, on everything.

Thoughts:

- I like how Gimbo is initially okay with being lynched, but after reaching L-1 is suddenly changes his mind, yelling not to hammer him. And by "like" I mean "am now further convinced Gimbo is scum due to".

- I don't like this attitude that if Gimbo's town, the town has lost. We're still 'allowed' one screw up before winning, and even if he's not lynched today, there's no reason we can't attempt to identify the other scum and lynch them just in case he is (insane) town. Choosing D2 lynches in advance is poor play (and quite frankly I suspect the people trying to do so) and if nothing else, pessimistic.

- I don't like forbiddanlight's post 189. It sounds to me like the scum trying to reign in their newbie member, and I don't like the absolute statement "You claimed scum, so you need to be lynched.". If Gimbo is somehow town, I'd be looking fairly hard at these two.

- Firestarter, honey, answer the Adel's goddamn question. (ie. Which one pair do you think is most likely to be scum partners with Gimbo/SSF) Your post 227 is awful.

Also, out of your last 10 games as town, how many have you won?

That is irrelevant to this game, and I can't think of anywhere you could be going with it that would be useful. Not to defend Gimbo here, but I don't think he really needs to answer

that

question.

Therefore, Gimbo is back at L-2.

Vote: Gimbo

Problem solved. (Gimbo's reactions under pressure tipped me over the edge, plus all the previous reasons that Gimbo has still done nothing about to change my mind. Also ... Yeah, we should probably wait a couple of days before lynching to give everybody a chance to give their opinions before the flip, just in case.)

[Nameless]

Nameless, context is the king. I said not to hammer me because once the lynch is put through, Day 1 ends. I want to get in as much Day 1 discussion as possible before the day ends.

Obviously, but that's an excuse ANYONE can use and you at least posted that you expected to be lynched, so this isn't something that's come out of nowhere. The bandwagon against you built up slowly. Conversely, you change your mind about being lynched very quickly.

Also, you point to an 'overreaction' from me which confuses me. So are you saying that because a player wants the day to last longer, he/she must then be scum?

I'm not sure what I said that you're referring to here. You seem to be putting words in my mouth.

Now I know (I really do) that this sounds terribly WIFOM and like I'm just trying to save my own skin, but you know what, take it with a grain of salt then, its up to you to form your own opinion.

Lampshading scumtells against yourself doesn't make them any less valid, you know.

- I don't like forbiddanlight's post 189. It sounds to me like the scum trying to reign in their newbie member, and I don't like the absolute statement "You claimed scum, so you need to be lynched.". If Gimbo is somehow town, I'd be looking fairly hard at these two.

Ok, so we should let either a liar, or someone who admits to being scum live?

What the heck? I voted for Gimbo, and asked for him lynched shortly. That doesn't mean I'm going to ignore what could well be slips from other mafia. And I really think lovers mindlessly voting together is a bad thing, for reasons already stated early.

Nameless, if RIGHT NOW, the hammer went through and Gimbo flipped town, who would you go after?

I'd probably start by reading/analysing each player one by one, actually, but right now I'm thinking Knight/Forbid.

Let's look at the logic of "if [Player Name] is town".

-If Gimbo is town: he wants us to lynch a townie and then lynch ANOTHER townie (himself) - how does this help us at all?

Um, NO. I could see a town player making a statement like that because they were certain that '[Player Name]' is mafia, and thus don't believe they need to worry about what would happen if they were wrong. That's a sign of overconfidence, but not really a scumtell.

-Gimbo claims scum... (wtf??)

Yes ... That was everybody's initial reaction.

Oh and ...

Hey, Mod!

The vote count is incorrect. My vote is currently on Gimbo.

[Nameless]

Um...a bussing vote for knight...waaaait a second here. One mafia dies, all of them die. There's no point in bussing in this game, obviously.

This isn't really true. The Mafia can (and probably WILL with that kind of attitude) still bus, they'll just find a reason to change their vote before reaching a lynch ...

Well, I'm convinced, the scum-detecting prowess of the ascending colon is irrefutable. I will just mention that I have played/replaced in three mafia games so far and been lynched in

every

one and been town in

every

one

and

correctly voted scum in two out of three - a fine record, I think.

NO. BAD. Whether you're town or not is random and that's not anywhere near a "fine" enough record to prove any kind of experience, being lynched 3/3 times is a

bad

thing and even if it weren't that would be an entirely different logical fallacy. Not to mention this came from, what, somebody stating a gut feeling?

FOS: Harvey Pew

why should I worry about someone's gut when they have a case of the scums?

I do not like this post ... at all

Well, I LOLed.

My replies to it, over and over, were because Gimbo was giving the vibe that part of his master plan is that announcing your lover was such a pro-town move. As its been proven, it wasn't and isn't.

... Okay, just for reference here, WHEN and HOW was this "proven", exactly?

Final note: I dislike Forbid's posts 283 and 284. They don't add anything, and don't seem to have much point other than protesting how sorry she is and how much harder she'll try and how she really is town, honest.

[Nameless]

So why aren't people voting for Chelseafan?

(First of all, I'd just like to make the point that this kind of plan is the exact kind of thing that wouldn't work without a massclaim. Just saying.)

Two flaws in the logic, if I've understood it correctly.
1. Scum playing the game particularly risky in hope of being effectively cleared for an easy D2 win. If the more erratic players had already voted and they didn't think those who hadn't wouldn't without discussion ... It's not impossible, is what I'm saying.
2.I'm aware the pairing would appear unlikely, but I'm not sure there are four lovers willing to lynch. Both Adel and SpyreX quickly unvoted when Gimbo reached L-1.

If Chelseafan is town then it's likely Gimbo is town, but not certain.

[Nameless]

@nameless: does this post make more sense now?

I can see the logic behind it, but I could also see a townie voting for their lover in the opening out of jest (or mild venting of outside of game irritation, apparently) so I'd still call it a weaker argument.

Bad? It is

terrible

. I was

joking

when I said my record was good, but also pointing out how often townies are lynched by other townies acting in all good faith.

... Right. Don't mind me.

It was a random vote initially but I left it there after Gimbo's WIFOM/"I am scum" ploy. The votes on Gimbo increased over Eastern and Pacific time and then when it got round to BST I removed the vote.

You could have at least made that clear by making a "confirm vote:" earlier on.

[Nameless]

I'll be doing a reread and giving my thoughts on each player soon (probably ~12 hours from now), but I'm just chiming in to say:

Obviously not voting as another misplaced vote could mean scum could hammer if Harvey is not scum/

QFT. I suggest for the time being everyone uses HoS to indicate an intended vote.

[Nameless]

Ack, sorry about the lack of posting. An IRL issue was preventing me from posting.

(And by "preventing", I mean "distracting".)

(... aaand by "issue" I mean "purchase of Wii".)

ANYWAY. >_>

I wouldn't use the word 'confident', but at the moment I'm thinking SpyreX / Adel are probably town. There have a been a few small things I've disagreed with or thought odd, but overall their actions and ideas have been to the benefit of the town.

That said, FOS: Harvey Pew, Adel and

especially

forbiddanlight for their first D2 votes. HP's "punt" is such an obviously bad idea it hurts, I don't even know why Adel thought jumping on what be a good idea, and forbid's sudden change of mind (hoping to quicklynch?) and poor reasoning/defence (and if the mafia start voting while you're asleep?) are IMHO highly suspect. Also, Post 363. Just ... 363.

I posted earlier why lynching Chelseafan D1 was a flawed plan, but rereading CF's posts I don't really like that CF agreed (not to the point of self voting, but certainly didn't object) to the plan - As town, allowing somebody you KNOW to be a townie to be lynched (especially in this setup) only to mostly confirm somebody else town is such an inherently poor action that I would expect some resistance. (From eg. Adel's POV this isn't the case, obviously, as CF may well be scum.) Given that it was fairly likely at the time Gimbo would be lynched, I'm kind of wondering if CF reacted more casually to the plan - knowing it was unlikely to eventuate - to gain "townie points" for D2.

I personally don't see anything wrong with Adel's hammer. Everyone else had the chance of unvote if they didn't agree, and it's not like it came unexpectedly. I don't think further discussion would have gained us much more, and quite frankly the only person I blame is Gimbo.

If there weren't the risk of a quicklynch, I'd be voting for either Chenhsi or forbiddenlight, probably whichever had a bandwagon on them (but not to a lynch yet, obviously).

Also due to the fact that everyone is paranoid of being in LyLo at this situation, I would not discount mafia voting for each other early on knowing that it won't lead to a lynch.

I strongly agree with this statement, for the exact same reasons I found the plan to lynch Chelseafan flawed yesterday. If anything, the mafia would be more inclined to bus in this setup if they believe they can get away with it because people keep assuming they won't.

[Nameless]

(Oh godDAMNit, random crash. I had a moderate sized post too. I no longer trust Firefox. >_< Key points it is:)

@Firestarter: You're overreacting (and melodramatic, OMG) - Adel's list isn't going to give the mafia anything they couldn't have figured out by carefully reading the thread anyway. Unless you've got any better ideas, etc.

@Adel: I really don't like the way you've voted twice in LyLo without immediate reasoning and once only minimal. Either you are bad, or your overconfidence is.

@Adel (again): It would be pretty obvious if somebody changed their minds just because you believe a player innocent. Since the list was your idea the fact you intend to "clear" somebody last is suspicious and who is to say YOU aren't going to do the exact same thing?

@Shy Guy: I "cleared" SpyreX moreso because of Adel's actions D1, but I'm starting to like them less D2. :-/

[Nameless]

(though [Spyrex] did hammer, so I guess maybe that's not so great).

*facepalm* (And that goes for everybody else bringing up who hammered too.) There was seriously nothing wrong with that hammer, and it was no more due to Adel/Spyrex than anybody else who knew it was coming and remained on the wagon. Hammering somebody acting as scummy as Gimbo was, after the all the discussion we did have, not a scummy action. Really! [/I think I'm developing a pet peeve here.]

@Shy Guy: I "cleared" SpyreX moreso because of Adel's actions D1, but I'm starting to like them less D2. :-/

Why clear him because of Adel's actions? Why not clear Adel, in that case? You've given me nothing specific I can consider here, and I for one find Adel's actions highly suspicious.

Uh, I don't know, because they're lovers and must both be the same allignment? I said that I considered that

pair

the most likely to be town (what Adel actually first asked). I could point out specific posts where I found Adel or Spyrex townie or where anybody else seemed scummy, but I'm not sure how much it would help given this is more of a feeling that I've built up over the game than any defining moment.

... I sound like I'm overly defensive of Adel here but that's not really as much the case as it sounds from this post. I'd be interested in hearing Shy Guy's explanation for Adel/Spyrex/Chelseafan/Chenhsi, anyway.

[Nameless]

Would it kill

anyone

in this game to to use

HoS

in LyLo? Also,

I knew it.

I almost gave that exact example in my last post:

I

believe

you. [/sarcasm]

[Nameless]

There are certain actions that townies can do that are hard to fake, and certain things scum can do that are not often done by townies. Let us see post 56 by MafiaSSK. It is a simple post.

I guess that makes sense.

Those words sell me on him being town. He is being swayed by 53,54,55 by Adel and Spryex, and is showing that he had no preconceived agenda coming into the game.

I'm going to go with "no" here. Changing your mind to go along with somebody else, especially without discussion or explaining yourself, could also be mafia trying to blend in (although apparently mentioning that possibility is a "-" in your notes) or post without contributing to scumhunting. Having no preconceived agenda is ... what? So considering the last game or having a planned strategy would be less town? And being "sold" that one player is town on the basis of

five words

is just ... a bad idea, yeah.

Then, she actively pursued the easy lynch of Gimbo.

Clarify exactly what you mean by "easy", or is pursuing the lynch of somebody who appears to obviously be mafia wrong now?

I do actually agree with your points about Chelseafan and Chenhsi, but some of the ones against Chenhsi could be explained by disinterest in the game.

As for Firestarter & Nameless, there is a little positive on them and a little negative -- the positive from early on, the negative as I mentioned earlier in this post is about their willingness to go back on what they said about Spryex.

I can't speak on behalf of Firestarter (who, apparently, can't make up his mind if he's trusting Adel/Spyrex or gunning for them), but all I've done is clarify why I nominated them as the most townie pair at the time.

One last thing, although this is regarding style rather than the arguments themselves: For somebody claiming to be "as concise as possible", some parts of your post are quite waffle-y. The entire last paragraph of 487 probably wasn't needed, and I don't think an explanation for your method of note taking is strictly necessary to the point you're making.

Regarding post 489, please note: Chelseafan points out that only a few arguments are raised against her, but makes minimal attempt to defend herself against those few. And BTW, coherency probably isn't the right word, but declaring you'll vote for somebody right after stating you're "back to square one" is something of a contradiction.

@Harvey Pew: I agree, the wording was unintentionally quite amusing, but perhaps once you've reacquainted yourself with your anus you'd like to add your thoughts or in anyway aid discussion on this fine Day Two?

[Nameless]

perhaps once you've reacquainted yourself with your anus

What? Is that insulting, gnomic, cryptic? I really don't understand.

Eh, I somehow read your LOL as LMAO.

But then several other times he says he is opposed to a mass claim because if we don't do it, then the "scum will be disorganized" and possibly slip up.

That's not really that inconsistant. The Mafia probably paired off in the pre-game, but if they had planned to push for a massclaim then not doing so could screw with their game strategies (along with, you know, the TOWN's strategies, but let's not get into that again).

Nameless what are your suspicions of me and Harvey then? Because every time it is brought up that people think we're town you scoff at it - but never give any reason as to why.

I've given several reasons in past posts why I'm wary of you and particularly Harvey, but you've kind of lost me with the scoffing at people thinking you're town thing.

@ Adel - Now would be a good time to present your planned argument based on the question you asked the town. It's pretty clear we're not getting an answer from Chenshi anytime soon, and the original question was just to each pair rather than individual. Adding another question now seems a bit of a delaying tactic.

@ Shy Guy - I "like" how you've started backpeddling regarding MafiaSSK from "solid tells" and "these words sell me" to "I feel pretty weak about that" when challenged.

Second set of crossouts: The fact that early on every group was willing to vote for chelsea (one member, for this, I am including as two) makes me logically think they are town.

I've said this before but this is BAD LOGIC because the mafia are still going to carefully bus and lie regarding their intent, so unless somebody is actually involved in a lynch we can not be particularly certain they were willing to do so at all.

[Nameless]

... Then again, Adel hasn't exactly struck me as the kind of person to forget something as notable as that. But either way it's not something you should really be using as the basis of a case against someone, especially after that pair has brought it up and given an explanation. So that kind of makes me wary of Shy Guy.

...

Is anybody thinking of a Shy Guy / forbiddanlight / ZeekLTK / Harvey Pew scum group right now? Because considering how hard they're pushing fairly weak cases, I know I am.

[Nameless]

... Then again, Adel hasn't exactly struck me as the kind of person to forget something as notable as that. But either way it's not something you should really be using as the basis of a case against someone, especially after that pair has brought it up and given an explanation. So that kind of makes me wary of Shy Guy.

Where did they bring it up and give an explanation? Why isn't it case-worthy if Adel did remember and is lying?

Post 566 and post 567. And it isn't case worthy because you can't prove that Adel is lying and you couldn't really blame her for forgetting something in the mess that was Gimbo's lynching.

[Nameless]

Does that make sense to anyone?

Yeah. If forbidden is scum, that post would look scummy. Well done.

[Nameless]

Adel - I think it's pretty obvious at this point we're not getting anything substantial from chenhsi, but since the nature of the setup allows us to judge her alignment from partners I'd suggest just moving on with your plan ... which IIRC, would be you posting the pairs you thought most scummy.

[Nameless]

Nameless and his partner, on the other hand have been casting doubts about me with almost every bit of thought I put forward for consideration, yet they do little independent scum hunting based on day 1 that I can see, and when I asked them to show me where they'd done any the rest of my post was responded to and that part wasn't, if I recall correctly.

I probably haven't brought up much about Day 1 since it ended, but if so it's more because I haven't been putting the same level of time/effort into massive recap posts, scouring old discussions and such as other players have. It's not that I don't keep it in mind, but ... yeah. It doesn't exactly help this is my first non-newbie game as well. :-/

Also, I consider Forbid/ShyGuy and Zeek/Harvey the scummiest players at the moment. Independently; I don't know about them being the exact pairing, but I consider it unlikely they're both town.

[Nameless]

Vote: Shy Guy

Chelseafan getting replaced reeks of frustrated scum replacing out because buddy sucked.

Epic reaching.

I am not very willing to dismiss chenhsi's play as "always does that".

I'm not normally fond of using the meta game to accuse or defend people, but the fact that chenhsi is not really playing this game (or, apparently, others particularly much) is not indicative of scum as much as it is an issue with the player. Also, this strikes me as an attempt to make a policy lynch (Lynch All Lurkers?) rather than one based on strong evidence.

What about how Chelseafan wanted to lynch someone everyone else was willing to lynch? Why are they #1 town, after being the optimal lynch yesterday?

On a lesser note, these two questions irk me, although it's hard to point out exactly why. Neither actually indicate Chelsea's alignment, and the second is somewhat misleading of Adel's plan D1.

Intersting - Adel clears them, you say that's a distraction (which indicates Adel is scummy) and then say you want to vote the people Adel is clearing?

I think Shy Guy is referring to the whole plan, not just Adel's own choice. Of course, even if Adel were scum and it was a distraction, that's not going to stop the town from gaining anything useful from it if they pay attention. Downplaying it's value seems a worried thing to do anyway, especially before the initial 'strategy' is finished and it's purpose revealed.

[Nameless]

Vote: Shy Guy

Isn't there already a vote on him?

Hmm. Actually, my vote makes it one vote on each pair, which might be of interest.

Also, 12 days away and self confessed inactivity (#675)

really

should be enough to have chenhsi replaced.

[Nameless]

Mod

, you missed my vote (#667).

vote count fixed - mod

[Nameless]

I should probably say something here since it's been a few days since my last post, but there's nothing specific that I want to comment on.

However, a thought about the mafia quick lynching: After thinking about it, I'm not sure it's actually as a great a risk as it's being made out by some (or myself previously, for that matter). If there were two votes on townies from townies, then the mafia has the chance to place their four votes and win ... but the practicalities of that make it almost as much a risk for the mafia as it does for the town. Unless they'd actually arranged specific regular times to be online during pregame discussion (unlikely, I think, but not impossible if they were dedicated players) then the first three mafia to notice this are left with the choice between leaving it until the town is more convinced, or instantly placing their vote. Since only ONE townie needs to notice these suspicious votes compared to FOUR mafia placing them, an attempt at quicklynching is more likely to fail and place suspicion on the mafia than succeed.

Having two, three or even four votes on somebody for a length of time doesn't "clear" them.

[Nameless]

EBWOP: Yes, I meant what armlx said.

[Nameless]

@SpyreX: I've reached a conclusion: Shy Guy and FL are town.

Why?

1. I have a basic town read on both of them. Shy Guy has a comprehensive meta on me, and if he wanted a mis-lynch I think he would've gotten one on me by now.
2. If Shy Guy is scum, we're fucked.
3. By partnering up with them (if possible) and working together we should figure out who is scum with 2 out of 3 odds in our favor.

Number one is remarkably undescriptive, and that you haven't been lynched reflects on the whole town/mafia (you included) rather than one individual not yet succeeded in convincing the town to lynch you. Two has nothing to do with whether Shy Guy is scum or not (unless wishing hard enough will retroactively make it so) and three assumes Shy Guy is town to begin with.

That's kind of a really bad conclusion.

[Nameless]

That's kind of a really bad conclusion.

unvote, vote:Nameless

Another vote from Adel without any kind of explanation? Shocked, I am

shocked

.

Also, if Shy Guy starts overly trusting Adel in the near future I'd be unsurprised to find they were the mafia pair ...

[Nameless]

Firestarter, WTF. There has better be a good reason you're overreacting (to say the least) for being called out on inactivity. I know I'd love to hear it. Let's not lose the game because you won't admit to being lazy, no.

Although, to say one thing in Firestarter's defence, this setup has a total of two days so saying that we're in LyLo doesn't automatically prioritize it.

Nothing is possible to prove with absolute certainty. I don't see why belief is any more difficult to prove than other things.

Belief is rooted in your own assumptions of people's actions, not the visible effects of them.

This? This is why I don't to respond to every argument made.

[Nameless]

You think its funny, until you replace into a 70 page game. I replaced into 3 within a 2 week period, by the last one I just didn't even both reading.

Mushroom Kingdom Mafia. I replaced in at 65. So, I'm still the least but I still know the feeling.[/quote]
Either I'm exceptionally lazy, or you people are crazy.

[Nameless]

Give me a good reason why exactly I should be claiming that and I will. You and Shy Guy have failed to do so thus far.

Because everyone else has.

That's actually a pretty bad answer compared (obv. thus everyone already knows anyway, and see also: if everyone jumped off a bridge etc.) compared to better ones available but I'd imagine somebody probably feels like strangling Cyberbob regardless right now.

Your arguments feel like a strawman.

I don't think a strawman is what you think it is.

Well, actually I do. You are ascribing a position to Shy Guy, that he found Firestarter scummy enough to try to trip you up, that I don't feel he really intended. And you are arguing against this. Thusly, it's a strawman.

I think it's pretty obvious that Shy Guy 'intended' to trip up Cyberbob if he were scum, but still knew that it was unlikely to directly work. Also, how is 'attempting to trip up the replacement for somebody you found scummy' a bad thing to be attributing to someone anyway?

And ... 865, Shy Guy is reaching again.

[Nameless]

I make exactly three statements in this post that I can see. Which of them is reaching, and why? You say I am reaching again... when was I reaching before? Why do you say this?

A sentence doesn't have to be a literal statement to say something, does it? Isn't it possible that questions themselves can carry implications (ie. be rhetorical) or a barrage of such hoping for some telling answer also count as reaching? Do you believe that responding to (eg.) a simple observation of Harvey Pew's was really worth an interrogation over any more than one request for clarification? Do you remember post 658? Would you believe that I know you are mafia and hope to persuade the others of this fact?

[Nameless]

?? I did come to a conclusion. It is you and Adel, or the other four.

And what does that conclusion even mean? Absolutely nothing. You have not said anything that helps anyone figure out who is scum, just made arbitrary pairings amongst everyone that isn't you.

Not to say a word in Shy Guy's favour or anything, but this statement by armlx is just flat out wrong. Regardless of whether Shy Guy is actually correct or not (obv. not, Shy Guy is scum ) highlighting/eliminating certain pairings does help eventually deduce the mafia pair and given the amount of arguments (false or otherwise) made by Shy Guy they're hardly 'arbitrary'.

[Nameless]

Chiming in to say that as someone is fairly sure they know who the scum is (Shy Guy, Adel) but is too lazy to reread and search through the entire thread, a deadline to get everybody else talking would be something I selfishly support.

In summary, I just don't know.

I think I liked Firestarter as my lover more.

[Nameless]

You have no evidence for why you think that Nameless and Erg0 would not be scum together.

Adel, do you intend to provide evidence to disprove every single pairing you don't agree with?

so you are blaming your failure to seriously examine the alignments of other players on Shy Guy's scumminess?

If player A appears by far the most scummy, then the knowledge that player B is slightly more scummier than player C becomes less important than ensuring player A is lynched.

Now that forbiddanlight chose Erg0 over Skruffs and Cyberbob to place a second vote upon, I really hope to take some time to think about why you are voting with Nameless, and if tunnel-vision is negatively impacting your ability to identify scum.

Even if armlx believed me to be scum, that doesn't mean voting with me would be a scummy action. I haven't changed my vote since the deadline was set so you could easily imagine a left over bus vote (or, for that matter, the real scum bussing now with the intent of unvoting just before the deadline so that nobody can react).

[Nameless]

-I am going to Assume Adel is town because I don't think she would clear me otherwise.

-this is going to make scum claim "adel-shy guy",

This is, what, preemptive OMGUS?

[Nameless]

it basically outs Nameless/Cyber as scum.

How does it do that?

it is an odds/math thing.

I can't quite put into words how poor an idea gambling on a hunch that might

slightly

increase your chances of hitting scum over a random vote is when compared to the amount of dubious actions and arguments displayed by other players (or even myself) previously that you could instead vote on. Of course, it's hard to take any votes by Adel seriously with how often they've changed for little reason, but forbid jumping on for no better reason would obviously seem to further indicate them being the mafia group.

Not to mention voting someone because nobody is voting them seems ... counter intuitive.

[Nameless]

Adel, Spyrex, Forbiddanlight and Shy Guy just all jumped to vote me, so help me god if any town players hammer without stopping to think about the pattern here ...

[Nameless]

vote: Adel

(Given they're both mafia, I'm happy for either to be lynched, and this puts Adel closer to my current votecount ... :/)

[Nameless]

For the record, this may in fact top everything Zeek did as being scummy. From the ho-hum all the way through.

For the record, saying one post is possibly the Most Scummiest Thing Ever(tm) but being unable to point out one single thing that makes it so is at least slightly scummy.

[Nameless]

Armlx, skruffs, please reconsider voting Adel over Shy Guy. (I presume I'll be the deadline lynch as the first player to 4 votes otherwise.)

[Nameless]

I know it is a weak argument in most games, but it does bear mentioning here - 4 votes have sat on Namless far more than long enough for a quick hammer.

Obviously it's a weak argument when the four votes on me come from the four people I was already reasonable sure were scum. The mafia can't quick lynch when they're the only one's voting. (/Obvious)

This is likely my last game on mafiascum for a long time if not forever, so it would be really swell if we could lynch scum and win.

Emotional appeals? Now really, let's not sink that low.

[Nameless]

Unvote, Vote: Shy Guy

As I said before, I am willing to lynch either mafia pair.

[Nameless]

Erg0's current switch makes NO SENSE considering he said I was most town like 4 posts ago.

FYI, that was a week ago real time and since then you kind of blatantly linked yourself with someone Erg0 considered scummiest, nevermind the voting that (probably) ruled out his initial judgement.
I don't think changing your mind in the face of additional evidence counts as a scumtell ...

skruffs & armlx-- which players have been working in this game, paying attention, and trying to scumhunt?

Frequently voting without reasoning and fussing about plans that you never eventuated might have given you a high post count but that's hardly the same as successfully scumhunting.

Also, I admit my dedication to this game has been somewhat shaky at points, but that's an issue outside of town-mafia alignment.

Armlx/Skruffs, this one's up to you guys. I have very low hopes that either of you will be open minded and win the game.

Insult the players. Yeah, that's always going to help.

[Nameless]

... I would really like you to examine Nameless and Cyberbobs rapid change in posting amount, style and tone in the last few pages.

To be fair, we are in deadline, which (to me, anyway) has made the last few days more interesting to keep up with. (It helps that I've had the last two days off work as well.)

which players have been working in this game,

paying attention,

and trying to scumhunt?

I'm not surew how I missed Spyrex's post at 411.

I'd totally forgotten about that.

sorry, I'm suffering from a serious case of "Mafia is stupid and pointless" I can't concentrate in games right now.

sometimes I am amazed that I am ever functional with this level of retardation.

fuck -- firestarter answered them.

(I'm sorry, I couldn't help myself. Please carry on attempting my lynch. )

[Nameless]

Unvote, Vote Nameless

... you know what, screw it. I don't quite think I'm able to convince you otherwise in the next few hours or so, and even if Harvey Pew actually showed up on my side it wouldn't help now.

*Concedes defeat*

Good game all. (Particularly Adel, although you were actually wrong about one thing.)

[Nameless]

Is this supposed to imply regretful townie or defeated scum? Cause either way it's a bundle of WIFOM I'm not taking.

LOL, I thought I'd leave it ambiguous just in case anyone else felt like arguing the point until deadline. I did actually mean the conceding defeat part.

(And said 'one thing' was that, no, I wasn't deliberately lurking as mafia strategy. I did lose interest for a while due to the difficulty of keeping up and arguing with my first serious non-newbie game ... and new video games, yeah.)