Mini 672 - Tranquility (Game Over)

[Lord Gurgi]

The Eighth Votecount

stormer (3) - Malyss, Stef
Rishi (2) - charter, DraketheFake
melikefood (2) - SpyreX, Porkens
Stef (1) - KMD4390

Not Voting (6) - melikefood, Rishi, stormer, camn, Nameless, Kmd4390

Deadline's coming up.

[Rishi]

Okay. Back now. I apologize that I haven't been able to say much in this game yet. I find myself with a lot less time to play Mafia than I used to have. I still enjoy the game, but I have cut back to one game (this one) plus modding two. So, every once in a while I might check in with a 1-2 line post that doesn't add much. I see that it's not really productive in this game, so I'll try not to do that as much.

I don't really see anything specific to respond to. Just my wishy-washy stance on stormer. Well, I've seen the likes of stormer quite a few times before. Bad newbie player. What he's been doing so far is chasing a bad argument and he doesn't seem to know it's bad. But, honestly, I think it's a null-tell. I really could believe that he would say these things as town. Malyss makes a good point that stormer hasn't played in any games that started with night, but stormer has been a replacement in practically every game he played. In any case, I think the meta-read of stormer is interesting, for those of you who find metas useful. Ongoing games, so I can't say more.

Looking at it, I don't like the stormer wagon (though it seems to have dried up somewhat). He's an easy target. He's not likely to say anything useful in his defense. And nobody will see an attack on him as scummy on Day 2 because, well, everyone will be kind of happy to get rid of a bad player and blame the player himself rather than the scum that might have been driving the wagon.

So, I guess I'll throw out a couple people that I think we should be looking at (who haven't gotten enough attention, IMHO):

charter - Seriously, all he does is agree with other people. He posts fairly useless one-sentence posts and does not contribute. Sure, he has suspicions, but he almost hides behind someone else when he posts them. Seriously, folks, do an isolated read on charter. I doubt anyone will be impressed.

Malyss - Power lurking. I also don't like how she's pretty much used all her posts going after stormer. I think this is just a chance to go after an easy target.

Anyway, I'm not sure people had any other specific things to say against me that I haven't already responded to. What I meant by my last post is just that - stormer scares me, because he says dumb things and obviously scummy things. But to me, it's just indicative of overall poor play - not necessarily scummy play. I'd look at the stormer wagon, no matter what you think. If he's Mafia (majority), then scum are probably piling on because he's an easy target. If he's town (minority), he's probably being bussed.

[camn]

I've always liked you, Rishi.

## Vote STEF

A) What rishi says makes a lot of sense, about the stormer wagon. Stef is still on said wagon.. yet does not pursue the issue. Why not? Do you still think Stormer is scum, Stef?

B) I hate this argument.

You

know

that SpyreX's original statement was a joke? Why are you so sure exactly? Not saying this is evidence of teaming up but sure seems suspicious to me and yet again throws attention away from himself.

Getting caught up in semantics is the scummiest way to hunt, IMO. You look like you are doing good hunting, with evidence and everything.... but you aren't. Semantics suck.
Also, the tenative nature of this accusation irritates me. Either say it's scummy.. or ask for clarification... or leave it alone. Don't bring it up and say "I'm NOT SAYING this is scummy... but blah blah blah"

c

[Kmd4390]

Nameless, are we going to get any of your own thoughts or just observations from you?

[Stef]

You are the one putting words into someone's mouth. How is wanting to be an informed majority (I'm sure everyone would like to be in that position) trying to make someone think he is town? You are making no sense at all.

I did post

Damn.. always read "informed majority" as "informed minority" >.< :embarrassed:

Ok, sorry. I was under the impression that voting was a way to cast suspicion. I wasn't aware that you were voting for reasons other than trying to find scum. My bad.

Where did I vote for him? Sorry for asking. I had two votes cast so far. On Charter and on Stormer and we were discussing neither of the two in this discussion.

If you found it suspicious, why not speak up about it?

Because i didn't know what to think of it and don't like to talk when i only have feelings witch oh.. yeah.. turned out to be useless considering i misread what SpyreX wrote.

Your defense was "but look over here. some one else was doing it too."

Not really... i told him it was funny to accuse me of it since he was doing it as well. Was more of an observation about his game and it was ironic that he made an observation about my game when he had the same thing in his. Interesting how you don't see the problem in him playing the game that way but you do in me doing the same thing. I don't personally think this is scumtell or i would have voted for him.

Nope, you just voted for him. There's no way some one could mistake that for you being suspicious of him.

Again, where did i vote for him?

The rest is stupid anyway. All i see is a desperate need to make up arguments that don't exist to get rid of the suspicion on YOU considering people have been accusing you of teaming up with me. If you were town that wouldn't have made you have such a bad reaction. Your arguments are based on:
1. A mistake i made and admitted to have made.
2. Semantics regarding my second post in the game witch i do believe i explained.
3. A regard considering SpyreX's game where you draw some conclusions from thin air.
4. One or two votes you claim i casted.. when i actually didn't.
So people start accusing you of defending me and teaming up with me and the next second you bring up an old subject to pick on me and bring up these arguments and make a big fuss out of them to get yourself clean. If there were no suspicions on your head why did you jump up so fast and with so much passion? ( The WHAT???!?!?!?!?!? part )

Even if the stormer things still is on the table right now Kmd seems way more premeditated than stormer so ..

##Unvote ##Vote:Kmd4390

I still want a reply from stormer to the allegations he received.


Camn you just strike me with your lack of arguments when you tag along. What did you have to say about me now? That not retracting my vote means i think he is scum but if i haven't pursued the issue it means .. what? I still suspect him and waiting for an explanation from him. And then you pick on my semantics in the same phrase you accuse me of using semantics as an argument. I can use any argument i consider valid and important. Wrong semantics might indicate foul play or nothing at all. That doesn't mean they should be dismissed as "bah he made a mistake". As far as

Don't bring it up and say "I'm NOT SAYING this is scummy... but blah blah blah"

I didn't say i'm not saying it's scummy. I just said i'm not sure that it's teaming up but that i DO find it suspicious. Where exactly is the problem?

[Nameless]

Theory (ie. gut-tell): Either Kmd and Steff are both poorly thinking innocents or they are both scum heavily bussing each other with whatever they can think of. Somehow I can't quite get my head around the fact that either of them could be entirely in the right ...

Nameless, are we going to get any of your own thoughts or just observations from you?

Clarify. What I've posted are both.

##LG: Could we get some prods happening? Drakethefake, Malyss and stormer.

DraketheFake and stormer have been prodded. With TAZERS.

[Porkens]

Good morning!

I didn't.
I said strawmans are fun.

That doesn't mean the argument I was responding to was a strawman.
I was setting up a Strawman and found the process fun.

So...Strawman.

I still really, really dislike this post (and it's predicessors). Untill melikefood manages to put together his first

real

post, or until someone else is somehow more scummy, I'll probably keep my vote on melikefood.

...attention seems to have moved casually away from stormer in this last page without any further defence by him. This may be indicative that stormer actually IS scum ...

if he were merely clueless innocent, I would have expected the scum to be pushing harder for his lynch than has been done

. However, if stormer is scum, it would go some way as to explaining why we're suddenly arguing again over an older issue.

Do you see what you've just done here? You're actually catching up to melikefood pretty quickly with this one.

camn

goes from;

I also think Stormer just made a clueless newbie error.
Though, I am not really convinced he shouldn't hang for it. Like.. is his play going to get better later on?

to;

What rishi says makes a lot of sense, about the stormer wagon. Stef is still on said wagon.. yet does not pursue the issue. Why not? Do you still think Stormer is scum, Stef?

With no intermediate conversation (on your part), you go from "well I guess we could hang him," to using his wagon as part of your case to vote Steff. This makes you seem desparate to build a case against Steff or to agree with KMD. I have no idea why you would want to do either.

melikefood

: Pull it together! I'm rooting for you!!

Nameless

: Let us know if you see the mistake with post 174!

camn

: 1. What about KMD makes you want to vote with him? 2. You're case on Stef seems very weak to me, how sure of it are you?

[Kmd4390]

I did post

Damn.. always read "informed majority" as "informed minority" >.< :embarrassed:

I hadn't seen this yet when I posted. My bad.

Where did I vote for him? Sorry for asking. I had two votes cast so far. On Charter and on Stormer and we were discussing neither of the two in this discussion.

Ok....
I was wrong, you didn't.

Because i didn't know what to think of it and don't like to talk when i only have feelings witch oh.. yeah.. turned out to be useless considering i misread what SpyreX wrote.

You should still say what you think instead of calling it a half joke. Misreading it is understandable because the whole town/mafia swap thing got a little confusing. The thing I didn't like was the way you wouldn't commit to calling it a joke or an accusation. I did this in my first game as scum and I just nailed scum for it in another game. That's why when I saw it here, I went after it.

Not really... i told him it was funny to accuse me of it since he was doing it as well. Was more of an observation about his game and it was ironic that he made an observation about my game when he had the same thing in his. Interesting how you don't see the problem in him playing the game that way but you do in me doing the same thing. I don't personally think this is scumtell or i would have voted for him.

Ok...
It looked like more of an "it's not scummy just because you are doing it."
This makes more sense now.

All i see is a desperate need to make up arguments that don't exist to get rid of the suspicion on YOU considering people have been accusing you of teaming up with me.

1, there wasn't much suspicion on me in the first place.
2, I see where they were confused in thinking that.
3, I honestly don't care if people think that I'm teaming up with anyone. I'm going to get my thoughts out regardless of how it looks.

I didn't see the half comment thing at first. I looked back and saw a useless post or two. I looked into you to see if I found anything but your defense looks good.

There was a little more of a purpose to voting you too but it failed miserably. I've noticed that if you come out early and attack some one enough that a wagon of 3-5 forms, the wagon will mostly contain newbs and scum. The wagon didn't form so either you are scum or my case wasn't good enough. I don't think I had a strong case so my gambit failed.

## Vote STEF

I did manage to get this out of it so maybe that's something....

Even if the stormer things still is on the table right now Kmd seems way more premeditated than stormer so ..

##Unvote ##Vote:Kmd4390

Understandable vote...

I still want a reply from stormer to the allegations he received.

That would be nice but I don't expect to get anything more than what we have already.

Oh and...

##unvote

Gut tells me camn or nameless but I'm honestly not too sure on where to go from here.

Nameless, it just looked like that post that at the end of the last page was more of a spectator comment than anything. It just seemed off to me.

[camn]

camn

: 1. What about KMD makes you want to vote with him? 2. You're case on Stef seems very weak to me, how sure of it are you?

2. I am One Vote Sure. A Vote #2 at that. It really depends on Stefs's answers...
1. I don't vote to be "with" people. I vote to pressure other people.

@ stef.. the "wrong" of it is this. If you aren't saying it is teaming up.. what are you saying? How is it suspicious? are you, in fact, saying anything?


@Porkens. If I had wanted to lynch Stormer, I would have voted him. my question about if he should still hang was really a question. I wanted to see if anyone would jump on it. . . .but nobody did. This fits in with Rishi's reasoning on the issue kind of nicely. I think he and I think alike.



Gotta run! School calls!

[Kmd4390]

2. I am One Vote Sure. A Vote #2 at that. It really depends on Stefs's answers...

Stef has already answered.

I was hoping for a wagon to form on Stef that I could look at. You were the only one to vote, so I guess that's where I go.

##vote camn

[Kmd4390]

2. I am One Vote Sure. A Vote #2 at that. It really depends on Stefs's answers...

Stef has already answered.

I was hoping for a wagon to form on Stef that I could look at. You were the only one to vote, so I guess that's where I go.

##vote camn

Fixed.

[Porkens]

2. I am One Vote Sure. A Vote #2 at that. It really depends on Stefs's answers...

Stef has already answered.

I was hoping for a wagon to form on Stef that I could look at. You were the only one to vote, so I guess that's where I go.

##vote camn

So you're vote was a trap? Is there anything else you'd like to add to this reasoning?

Tags Fixed.

[Malyss]

I know that I have a lot to make up for in being idle. I think that I was a little overwhelmed by the actual activity in this game, given how my current ongoing newbie game has been rolling along at a comatose pace. I've been a little afraid to get my toes wet.

Camn - She seems the vindictive sort, judging by her first vote. The sports related thing was unnecessary but done back towards the joke/random part of the game when there’s not much going on. She poses some good questions to Stormer regarding his inquiry into the town’s having a cop.

Charter - He says that he spelled out his reasons for voting Rishi, but in the post where he made that vote, he merely went with Nameless’ reasons. He does eventually elaborate a bit more on his vote. He is involved and asking questions, which makes his activity seem like it may be on the pro-uninformed majority side.

DraketheFake - Makes some interesting points about Camn’s cautiousness, which are worth keeping in mind.

Kmd4390 - Gets some early suspicion of Camn out of the way. Deals with some Yankee/sports related flap. There’s some discussion of the confusion over proper terms to use in this game to refer to town and scum. The whole issue over what to call the two sides is confusing. He helps to put some pressure on Stormer and makes some worthwhile observations that Stormer’s cop question may have been a blaring newbie error or if Stormer is informed-minority, then he may later screw up. Considering his investigation of Stef, Kmd comes off as a being a good investigator. I like what I am seeing here. The questions are good and the ability to see reason when the person that Kmd is investigating offers reasonable explanations help to give me a positive view of this player.

MeLikeFood - He says a little more once he gets to his 6th and 7th posts, but even then...he still isn’t really saying much. I can’t even judge him by any votes that he has made, as he has not made any yet.

Nameless - Votes and then unvotes Charter to pursue Rishi and then makes an interesting observation about Camn. He moves between investigations of various players, which comes off as a good way to ferret out information especially when the activity levels of various players do not lend themselves to timely answers. He makes a good point about how the town’s attention has been redirected from the focus that had been on Stormer.

Porkens - I tend to like it when replacements come in and give a review of their perceptions of the current players. The quoting in his last post is throwing me off a little. Overall, I don’t have a clear perception yet of Porkens one way or the other.

Rishi - Like others, he makes some good points about getting the town to agree on the proper terminology to avoid allowing players to later backpedal their points. The question about whether or not scum would be as obvious as Stormer stands out and Nameless made a comment about WIFOM, which seems worth considering. From what I understand, all things happen. What might be a blatant tell in one game might not be in another. I think that I’ll be keeping an eye on any interactions between Rishi and Stormer. Still, Rishi and others may have a good point that Stormer might fall into the bad-newbie player category based on his faux pas in this game.

Easing into this game, it was easy for me to put my focus on Stormer and I can see that I have been lurking a bit. I’m going to do what I can to correct this lurking issue.

SpyreX - Early on, he started off with humorous posts, but once he got serious, things became more interesting. The case that he lays out against MeLikeFood makes some good points. I can see MeLikeFood as being another worthwhile target in addition to an ongoing suspicion of Stormer.

Stef - I feel a bit confused or overwhelmed in reading his posts. (By this point, I’m getting a bit tired and it’s getting closer to being time for me to get ready to go into work.) I feel like he seems a bit defensive, which might be understandable considering the pace that this game has had at points.

Stormer - He makes either a blatant faux pas or a bad newbie scum mistake in inquiring as to whether or not our town has a cop. It really stands out and is hard to ignore. His subsequent posts do not help his case. I still stand by what I’ve said in my sparse posts about him. He has stood out like a red flag, but maybe he really did just make a bad newb mistake, but if not, he might be worth putting on the back burner for a second day lynch while we ferret out the other informed minority members.

[Kmd4390]

So you're vote was a trap?

Did you read?

There was a little more of a purpose to voting you too but it failed miserably. I've noticed that if you come out early and attack some one enough that a wagon of 3-5 forms, the wagon will mostly contain newbs and scum. The wagon didn't form so either you are scum or my case wasn't good enough. I don't think I had a strong case so my gambit failed.

Camn was the only one to vote Stef after my "case".
I'm not sure what to think of this yet, but basically, I didn't get the reaction I was looking for from everyone.
Usually, something like this can get a wagon of newbs and scum.
I'm going to look into camn a little more.

[Porkens]

So you're vote was a trap?

Did you read?

Sorry, I did miss that part.

I've been told before, though, that posts meant to "trap" other players day 1 usually come from scum.

[Kmd4390]

Yankees suck.

Meerkats Suck.

A) Monkeys are depressing.

3 avatar attacks. This is interesting. I know it was the joke phase, but I thought it was interesting that you did this 3 times.

b) Instant Rishi Bandwagon?

Ok, so you don't like the Rishi wagon. Ok.

Do you mean "What is wrong with a healthy bandwagon on Rishi early in day one? ". .

The answer is.. Nothing at all.

Ok, now you don't have a problem with the wagon and your case on charter is now "Monkeys are depressing". This was a very quick change here. First, you voted some one for wagoning Rishi, and now "nothing is wrong with the healthy wagon".

And if you MUST know.. I used the 4 minutes to check and make sure you only had one vote... because I don't really suspect you enough to be the 3rd vote. I'm not as impulsive as I used to be

You are being too careful with your vote. Putting some one at L-4 isn't an "impulsive" vote that is going to get him lynched. It is enough to add pressure and get answers. Now, if he is lynched, maybe people look at the 3rd or 4th vote and see it as scummy. Scum have reason to be careful about a 3rd vote. Townies don't.

Also.. I don't see anything inconsistent about voting someone for piling on a couple votes.... while taking care NOT to do it myself.

You REALLY don't want to look like scum. You should be putting your thoughts out without caring how you are perceived. If you die, we can gain information after your death. If you are town, put your thoughts out even if it may look bad. Vote for who you think is scum.

But I don't really think charter is TOWNIE SCUM right now.. so

### Unvote

Then why did you vote for him? You said IN THIS POST that he hadn't answered your questions yet, and you UNVOTE??? This is some serious backedaling.

Actually I just wanted to vote for Charter.
He killed me last game

But I'm over it now.
Time to GET SERIOUS!

So you want us to discredit anything that you have said up to this point? You say that you were joking up until now? Even if you were, that was a long time to still be joking.

Rebel Alliance Sucks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this ANOTHER avatar attack???
we were out of the joke phase....

I've always liked you, Rishi.

buddying up...

## Vote STEF

My case on Stef was a gambit that I like to use (call it the Kmd Gambit in future games. Feel free to use it.) where you pick any target, build an attention grabbing case, and see what happens. If you can get some people on the wagon, they are probably scum or newbs. Now, what if it's just a convincing case and people just happen to agree? That's possible but you can avoid this with timing. Not long after the joke phase ends, nobody is going to want a lynch yet. Experienced town aligned players will probably question your case and maybe even vote for you. Scum will say "good case" and vote. Newbs will think it is a good case and vote.

2. I am One Vote Sure. A Vote #2 at that. It really depends on Stefs's answers...
1. I don't vote to be "with" people. I vote to pressure other people.

You seem to be very careful of where you are on a wagon. I've already said why this is only something scum needs to worry about. Also, you really seem to be avoiding looking connected to anyone.
One question for you:
Why do you take so much consideration into how you will be perceived?




So, here's a bulleted list of my case.
-3 (or 4 maybe) avatar attacks (not a big deal)
-quick to change your mind about the Rishi wagon.
-worried about being 3rd vote on charter.
-trying too hard not to look scummy.
-backpedaling with charter vote.
-either discrediting everything above this as joke OR staying in joke phase too long.
-buddying up.
-victim of the KMD gambit.
-too worried about perception

I think my gambit may have caught scum.

##vote camn

[Kmd4390]

I've been told before, though, that posts meant to "trap" other players day 1 usually come from scum.

I can see where this would come from.
Scum have to try to be deceptive. Town really doesn't have to.
I just like using a few different techniques to catch scum.

[camn]

your gambit is flawed. Why? Because my vote has nothing to do with yours. I paid no attention to it whatsoever.

Now, I will try and answer your questions... though there are a lot..

Regarding EVERYTHING before my vote for Stef:

I dispute your assertion that early Day One votes are or even SHOULD be based on "who one thinks is scum"
This early, I vote for pressure. For reactions. To see who else will follow. ANd other reasons I am not even thinking of. I vote to start discussion, and to look back on later.
You have admitted that you do some of the same things.

My case on Stef was a gambit that I like to use ....

Yet, you have repeatedly asserted that one should only vote for someone they think is scum.

Vote for who you think is scum.

So you see, the inconsistency is yours. You say you should vote for who you think is scummy, yet you state your vote for Stef is a "gambit".

Your inconsistencies go further.
May I point out these things about your case:

You REALLY don't want to look like scum. You should be putting your thoughts out without caring how you are perceived.

One question for you:
Why do you take so much consideration into how you will be perceived?

Which Is it?

Also...

buddying up... [with rishi]

Yet

Also, you really seem to be avoiding looking connected to anyone.

Again.. which is it?


ANyway.. your case is flawed.
Do I think you are scum? No. I think that scum wouldn't build a case this large this early in the game.. .unless they were bussing.
But, I hope you are as logical as you seem, and can admit the flaws in your case.

[camn]

EBWOP.

Regarding thi line:

You REALLY don't want to look like scum. You should be putting your thoughts out without caring how you are perceived.

I read this wrong. My apologies. I retract that point. They others stand, however.

[Porkens]

Yet, you have repeatedly asserted that one should only vote for someone they think is scum.

Ummmm, sorry, but could you point out which posts KMD said this "repeatedly"?

[Kmd4390]

my vote has nothing to do with yours. I paid no attention to it whatsoever.

Timing works against you here.

I dispute your assertion that early Day One votes are or even SHOULD be based on "who one thinks is scum"
This early, I vote for pressure. For reactions. To see who else will follow. ANd other reasons I am not even thinking of. I vote to start discussion, and to look back on later.
You have admitted that you do some of the same things.

This is true. You vote for reactions and discussion early on. The goal is to eventually find scum though.

Yet, you have repeatedly asserted that one should

only

vote for someone they think is scum.

Quote fixed.
What I have said is that if you think some one is scum, vote for them. Don't sit around wondering if you are scummy for voting for them.
I am ok with pressure votes or anything that guages reactions as long as it works in favor of the town.

You say you should vote for who you think is scummy, yet you state your vote for Stef is a "gambit".

Yes, if you think some one is scummy, vote for them.
Yes, my vote for Stef was a gambit.
Just because I say voting for scum is the goal doesn't mean that every vote in a mafia game is going to be for some one who you think is scum. You don't place every vote saying "ok, lynch this person now."
If you do think some one is scum though, that's where your vote should be.

Your inconsistencies go further.
May I point out these things about your case:

You REALLY don't want to look like scum. You should be putting your thoughts out without caring how you are perceived.

One question for you:
Why do you take so much consideration into how you will be perceived?

Which Is it?

How is it inconsistent? Why does it have to be one or the other?
I said...
"You should be putting your thoughts out without caring how you are percieved."
I am saying that this is what you SHOULD be doing, not what you actually ARE doing.
So again, I ask you:
Why do you take so much consideration into how you will be perceived?

Also...

buddying up... [with rishi]

Yet

Also, you really seem to be avoiding looking connected to anyone.

Again.. which is it?

Again...
You seemed to be buddying up to Rishi. This is NOT usually a scum to scum connection. Buddying up is when scum buddy up to town in order to look more town.
You are trying hard to avoid being connected to anyone in a scum to scum way.

You haven't been answering my accusations so far, only saying how you think they are flawed.

ANyway.. your case is flawed.
Do I think you are scum? No. I think that scum wouldn't build a case this large this early in the game.. .unless they were bussing.
But, I hope you are as logical as you seem, and can admit the flaws in your case.

I don't see the flaws right now but I have to admit, the no OMGUS is something that I didn't expect.

-3 (or 4 maybe) avatar attacks (not a big deal)
-quick to change your mind about the Rishi wagon.
-worried about being 3rd vote on charter.
-trying too hard not to look scummy.
-backpedaling with charter vote.
-either discrediting everything above this as joke OR staying in joke phase too long.
-buddying up.
-victim of the KMD gambit.
-too worried about perception

These points all stand so far.

[Nameless]

Nameless

: Let us know if you see the mistake with post 174!

The argument could be called somewhat WIFOM, if that's what you mean. That you put the onus on me to point out problems with my own thoughts looks kind of bad for you, though - aside from the obvious possibility of fishing, you're attempting to discredit an argument without any explanation yourself.

Considering his investigation of Stef, Kmd comes off as a being a good investigator

Faith in Malyss - lost.

[Stormer] might be worth putting on the back burner for a second day lynch while we ferret out the other informed minority members.

Planning lynches in advance = BAD.

Kmd, you now say that your attacks on Stef were in part a gambit to lure scum onto the first strong bandwagon. However, there have been other more successful bandwagons you could have done the same with (eg. stormer), and from one point of view all it looks like you have done is given up lynching Stef and justified your poor bandwagon attempt by now attacking camn. What say you to this?

[SpyreX]

My case on Stef was a gambit that I like to use (call it the Kmd Gambit in future games. Feel free to use it.) where you pick any target, build an attention grabbing case, and see what happens. If you can get some people on the wagon, they are probably scum or newbs. Now, what if it's just a convincing case and people just happen to agree? That's possible but you can avoid this with timing. Not long after the joke phase ends, nobody is going to want a lynch yet. Experienced town aligned players will probably question your case and maybe even vote for you. Scum will say "good case" and vote. Newbs will think it is a good case and vote.

Here's the big problem(s) with your gambit:

1.) You could easily be scum building a weak case and, when called on it, simply say "Ohh it was a gambit"
2.) You are actively building a case you don't believe in: which means that you are NOT hunting for scum.
3.) You've said yourself that scum AND newbs would be inclined to agree - you are making the key mistake of assuming scum are idiots and, more likely, that it is going to be only newbs.
4.) More likely than not this gambit is going to backfire and, therefore if you are town, you are sacrificing yourself for no gain OR putting yourself in a position of suspicion for people to shift focus on until you're lynched.

Now, although I'm not clearing camn at all (because some of it IS suspicious). Overall your case isn't strong.

-

3 (or 4 maybe) avatar attacks (not a big deal)

-quick to change your mind about the Rishi wagon.

-worried about being 3rd vote on charter.

-trying too hard not to look scummy.

-backpedaling with charter vote.
-either discrediting everything above this as joke OR staying in joke phase too long.
-buddying up.

-victim of the KMD gambit.

-too worried about perception

The ones above really have no merit. However, the one thing that I DONT like that you didn't bring up at all is the voting for pressure vs voting for scum or scummy behavior.

Really, scum have far more reasons to vote for "pressure":
1.) It can and does build bandwagons because townies seem to just crack and get themselves hung.
2.) Its far easier to remove a vote for "pressure" to hop on a bandwagon than to actually move a vote on someone you think is scum.
3.) Scum aren't going to (in general) hunt for scum so any other reason to justify a vote is a good one.

So, am I suspicious of Camn? Yes.
Am I suspicious of you for building a weak case? Yes.

Do either of these look near as scummy as melikefood? Ohh HOSS no.

[melikefood]

Honestly, my combination of laziness, self-conciseness, and over defensiveness makes me an awful player of mafia.

You want me to make myself look dumber, or can I just jump to claiming my role?

>.>

[SpyreX]

Honestly, my combination of laziness, self-conciseness, and over defensiveness makes me an awful player of mafia.

You want me to make myself look dumber, or can I just jump to claiming my role?

>.>

Appeal to emotion? Check.
Softclaiming a power-role? Check.

Lynching this guy? NOT CHECK YET COME ON PEOPLE.