Mafia 88- Return to New Catania- Game Over!

[Sir Tornado]

Vote Battle Mage

OMGUS!

Sir T

Vote: Tornado

Blatant scum.

BM

[Sir Tornado]

Why are you voting no lynch again?

vote: no lynch

obvscum

[Sir Tornado]

... you were already voting me

Sir T

Unvote, Vote: Tornado

BANDWAGON!

BM

[Sir Tornado]

Vote: Sir Tornado

Gah, I realise you're probably mocking BM, but please. Stop. Doing. That.

Bah. You ruined the entire fun out of it :/. But, I was also partly trying to get someone put up a nonsensical case based on it, but I guess it doesn't matter now, and probably wouldn't have mattered all that much anyway.

unvote

vote Hoopla

[Sir Tornado]

unvote

FoS Seraphim

Why on earth would a townie, with no guilty feelings feel there is a trap somewhere?

BTW, I have changed my view on Hoopla. I don't think his early actions were scummy anymore. I don't think GC is scummy at this point either.

BM, stop multi posting please. It increases the page count too much and starts depressing me when I turn up at this thread after a gap of couple of days.

[Sir Tornado]

Honestly with him it's a null tell. There are better things to talk about it seems. Such as Hoopla's no lynch vote. Is it a scum gamble or town gamble trying to lure out scum.

Can you envisage a situation where this can be a scum gamble? If so, what is it?

[Sir Tornado]

I understand newbies attacking newbies for newbie tell, but you should know better…and even though you are not currently voting Hoopla, you jumped on that because…?

Because of the no lynch vote.

[Sir Tornado]

and you know he is a newbie right?

Yep. You would realize that I ended up unvoting him and concluding that he is not scummy on page 4.

Especially you, Sir T: what's up with the weak little FoS? Yos2 too.

There really isn't any reason strong enough for me to actually vote for Seraphim. And, he still has to answer that question.

[Sir Tornado]

CKD, while I was third person on that wagon, I think I gave a bit of hint that I did not like that no lynch in my second post in the game before any one else had voted him, and I would have voted him at that point had I not been trying to rile BM (and, yes BM, you guessed the correct reason). Furthermore, the wagon wasn't exactly hot. GC, having voted Hoopla was getting some flak for doing so.

(still waiting for your answer Seraphim)

[Sir Tornado]

Ok, wait having read first page again, I conclude that contrary to my last post, the Hoopla wagon was hot when I voted him and GC didn't get flak from anyone except Hoopla himself till after I voted him.

[Sir Tornado]

CKD, while I was third person on that wagon, I think I gave a bit of hint that I did not like that no lynch in my second post in the game before any one else had voted him, and I would have voted him at that point had I not been trying to rile BM (and, yes BM, you guessed the correct reason). Furthermore, the wagon wasn't exactly hot. GC, having voted Hoopla was getting some flak for doing so.

(still waiting for your answer Seraphim)

So you didnt join immediately because those on the wagon already were getting heat?

BM

...

I am trully speachless here.

[Sir Tornado]

On another note, I like OGML's vote for Sir T, and am interested to see how Sir T responds.

I am still on page 9 when I read this... respond to what? There isn't anything to respond to! OGML obviously found something in my posts which he didn't like, and voted me. Don't see what I can do about that.

(catching up now)

[Sir Tornado]

Ok, a few thoughts as I start page 10:

1) I am convinced CKD is town. His attack on Sensfan seems to be very righteous and passionate.

2) I think Der Hammer is someone's alt who is trying to screw this game up by not taking it seriously. I am suspicious of usernames which include any mafia terminology to be alts in the first place, and his behavior upto page 10 doesn't do anything to dissuade me.

3) However, I am not so convinced about BM up to this stage though. I am noticing an overwhelming lack of smileys from him, which I think he puts a lot of when he is town, not sure if this is a general change in his posting style though.

i am supremely disturbed by yos' lurkerhunt "

I agree.

I'm disturbed more people aren't paying attention to who is lurking and who isn't. I'm tried of always having to be the only guy who even bothers to figure out who's been lurking, and then inevitably being attacked for it, even though it's clearly in the best interests of the town.

This does answer it though.

I'm not protecting lurkers, I already found scum, and thats more important.

Ah, the overconfidence...

I do play distinctly different as scum and as town usually, but the play style in this game is deliberately supposed to be a bit ambiguous because I was being sick of being NKed, especially after being NKed on N1 in my last game (which I was really starting to enjoy).

Unvote, Vote: Tubby

Now, this is really strange. You behave like you know 100% for sure I am scum and then you... jump on a up and coming bandwagon?

(Page 11 coming soon)

(Incidentally, I don't find Tubby scummy at all till now)

[Sir Tornado]

Before hand you were very adamant and confident that you had found scum and you vote was where you wanted it on Sir Tornado but as soon as a bandwagon comes along you seem to totally forget about your previous convictions and jump on said bandwagon. Why the sudden change of heart?

QFT, QFT.

The tubbywagon is meh. I prefer a Sir t/Seraphim wagon.

I am liking Shanba more and more in this game. If I ignore the fact that he wants me lynched, he seems very consistent and town-ish.

I'm slightly resentful that, after spending some time constructing a list of this nature, yos decided to do so aswell.

I am shocked BM didn't say anything on Tubby wagon in his first vote since the wagon started.

I didn't forget any previous convictions, but the sir t wagon doesn't, it seems, have any legs, and I like having my vote somewhere that it does some good.

But, if you are so convinced I am scum, shouldn''t you be trying to convince people that I am a scum, and if asked why? So far, your reasons were of the type:

"Vote Sir Tornado
I have found scum"

Criticising me for joining the bandwagon you are on makes me think you might already know its a bad wagon.

There is a difference between a bad wagon and a stupid wagon. If you want to accuse someone of doing something, think what they would gain from doing it. From where I am looking at right now, Tubby couldn't gain anything from saying what he did apart from landing a bunch load of votes on him. There are a few more people in the game (cue to YoS's lurker list) who may well be doing pretty much doing the same thing as Tubby is, except they are not stupid enough to say it aloud.

Many mafia players do a mistake in assuming only mafia can make stupid mistakes. They are completely wrong. Town can make very stupid mistakes too.

I am not criticising the wagon, I think it is good if it gets tubby talking and stops him lurking, but I was suspicious of you because you seemed so sure that Sir T was scum and then you just hop to another wagon. Would you care to elaborate on the phrase "have any legs"; I have never heard of it before. If I understand it correctly you thought Sir T's wagon was not going anyway and was not going to result in a lynch so you jump on another which could materialise into a lynch. This coupled with the speed at which you unvoted Sir T leads me to beleive you just want someone lynched rather than someone you actually beleive to be scum.

The bolded sentence. As you acknowledged, we are both on the same wagon. I have already said I support the wagon because I think tubby needs pressuring, you on the other hand say the bandwagon "has legs" which implies you think it is a good wagon and could result in a lynch. Yet in the bolded sentence you say I might already know it is a bad wagon. If you think it is a bad wagon then why did you join it? If I have misunderstood the phrase "has legs" then I suppose you can ignore this paragraph.

I agree completely with this post.

Let's see, there was an uncommented Vote.
Next we have "Can we talk more about how Sir Tornado is scum and needs a bigger bandwagon?"
Tries to prod Yos into joining the bandwagon, also with no actual comment on SirT
Somewhere in there he said he had found scum.

This makes me think why no one saw this before this... I would ask the same to Shanba too, but I know he doesn't explain his votes even if you ask him to, so I am not about to expend any energy in doing so.

Speaking of which, I still do want to hear from Sir T, and see what he thinks about the wagon on him (even if that wagon's gone away now).

I had my end semesters from 17th to 26th... but I should be back now. finished them about a couple of hours ago... but there were a few thoughts from me in the previous as well as this post (and possibly on the next one depending what happened those pages)

OH HAI THAR.

I hate you.

jester?

Sorry. The Fonz isn't about to jump the shark and put jesters in his game :p

(comments from page 12 coming up soon)

[Sir Tornado]

Mod: Can you repair the quote tags in my last post?

(The one in the very beginning) Thanks.

[Sir Tornado]

Page 12...

Vollkan replaces Panda Stomper 85.

Hello Vollkan


I agree with Shanba on the BM thing. Not liking BM's solution to it though. The proper solution was to not triple post everytime you visit this thread.

At least try.

unvote, vote: BM

I

really

don't like this vote. Do you think BM gains anything from not posting? If he did, would he be going on posting at a rate he was going before Shanba's request? Utter crap.

yawn,,,,Vote:BM

What I said to Natirasha.

I respectfully disagree.

In my experience, it's much more difficult to contribute to a game which is dominated by one player or one argument. You know those situations where two players are going at it hammer and tongs, posting ever longer lists of refutations and accusations at each other? Those make it very difficult for other players, as there's a tendency to sit back and watch the show.

Similarly, BM's posting dominating the thread makes it hard for other players to rise to the forefront. I believe his discussions about Hoopla, for example, have reduced the amount of information we would have received should Hoople have had to present the information his/herself.

Furthermore, it hurts the game going forwards, too - the larger the weight of information, the harder it is for players to catch up, to replace in or to reread the thread. And besides, when there's all this extraneous information about one player, other stuff about other players may get lost in the mass of BM's posts.

I agree with this in principle. I just don't think BM going V/LA is the solution though.

In the early days of his playing career, BM was famous for quoting upside down: that is, putting the text above the quote. Sir T was doing this, (presumably to mock or otherwise take the mickey out of BM), and I noted that it was incredibly annoying.

I wouldn't have done it had he typed my user name in completion instead of just the bland "Tornado".

92: I take issue with the way ST casually states that he no longer suspects Hoopla and doesn't think GC is scummy - no explanations are given for either of these.

I did explain it, I think. I voted Hoopla because I found his no lynch vote scummy, but as the game progressed, I came to the conclusion that it was not scummy. I believe I stated this somewhere.

Also, I vaguely remember waiting for someone's answer to something I asked.

[Sir Tornado]

Page 13. This is fun.

I agree mostly with what Vollkan says on this page.

Tubby is a lurker, like me...there can only be one lurker (me!) so he's got to go. Vote:Tubby

The wagon continues... well, you know what I feel about it by now.

Tubby, the tribe has spoken, it's time for you to go.

And again...

Putta Putta, is Tubby's situation in the game upto this point (page 13) much different than yours? (Apart from a few stupid comments here and there)

[Sir Tornado]

Page 14

Not much to comment on except for some weird behaviour from Natirasha, who isn't looking too pro-town in my opinion. BM not doing a good job at lurking either )

no but i assure you yos all will be revealed soon

Is "All will be revealed soon" your mantra with which you hope to start your own religion some day?

I do agree with YoS's points about Tubby at the end of the page though.

On to page 15 now... possibly after dinner.

[Sir Tornado]

There isn't much to report on pages 15 and 16 except Tubby has stopped lurking and is looking sane again.

Putta Putta, well... that is the sort of D1 bandwagon, which inevitably takes place in almost every game I play, and I am always uncomfortable with it, and I always announce, that I think that person is town, so let's get this out of the way:

I think Putta Putta is giving out null tells at the moment. The reasoning being, I don't see either town OR scum playing the way Putta Putta is playing at the moment. Horrible play. Has anyone played before with Putta? Is this normal for him (her?)?

[Sir Tornado]

Me too. If I'd thought he was at L-1, I totally would have hammered. If anyone deserves a policy lynch, it is Puta Puta, and that would be an awesome way to enter the game.

Hammer without a claim? Why would anyone want to do that?

[Sir Tornado]

Irony?

You clearly haven't seen me post 9 times in a row then, have you?

Well, now you have

[Sir Tornado]

Puta Puta, please claim.

[Sir Tornado]

Townies have two duties in this game: to help find scum, and to talk so that other townies can tell whether you are scum. You're not doing either. You're the mafia equivalent of the little league player who sits out in left field admiring the flowers and doesn't even try to catch the ball. It's obnoxious and makes the game less fun for me.

3 actually. The third one is don't do scummy things.

I'm a cop. I don't remember (if any) who I investigated O_O

either I didn't sent in a name for investigation or I did but something happened, cuz I never got a report, lol

Hi. There is a nice facility on this forum called "sentbox". Did you know of it?

Anyway, it allows you to see whether you have sent any PMs to anyone (hint: you have to PM the mod to send in night choices). Kindly check there before posting such ridiculous claims.

[Sir Tornado]

I think we have Puta Puta if he is scum. You can't get away with a false cop claim for a long time. We don't need to lynch him today, just in case he is a cop.

I suggest we let him go and look for new targets and ask him to claim his investigation results at the start of every day. I think that is the most optimum play at this stage.

If Puta Puta is lying, and there is another cop out then, then please don't counter claim. You are much useful lying low and getting in a few investigations in right now.

[Sir Tornado]

I'm really, really trying hard to convince myself to unvote Puta Puta in case he/she/it is a real cop.

So far it's not working.

Xylthixlm, the key to this is, what happens if he/she/it is a scum masquerading as a cop? We still have him/her on the rack. You can't hope to go a long way in a large game by claiming cop on D1. If Puta Puta is scum, it doesn't matter when we get rid of her, it just matters whether we do; but in case she is a cop, we don't want to lynch her right now. It's not as if we are in a LyLo or something right now.

[Sir Tornado]

Cop in both your games? Seems a bit far-fetched to me.

I can't help but agree to this BM, but I don't see lynching Puta Puta as a proper play. I mean, you may get lucky and find that she is scum, but you may get unlucky and find out that she is indeed a cop. But, we won't lose anything by saving her lynch for later if she is scum, but we will lose quite a lot by lynching her right now if she is a cop.

[Sir Tornado]

I choose to act as though no one would be in category 3, as it is a violation of forum rules, and therefore lynching someone who self-votes is always the correct action.

I see at least one other game where he/she/it threatened to self hammer but got hammered before he/she/it could do it, and was revealed as an insomniac cop. (check his/her/it's posting history)

The best we can do if he/she/it is not scum is to hope we keep him/her/it alive long enough to get him/her/it bored enough to ask for replacement.

[Sir Tornado]

The best we can do if he/she/it is not scum is to hope we keep him/her/it alive long enough to get him/her/it bored enough to ask for replacement.

I meant this more in real life days rather than game days.

[Sir Tornado]

And, BTW, if there is a replacement, and he/she claims that Puta Puta false claimed as cop as townie, I am all for a lynch. The ONLY way I support Puta Puta staying alive is if that character IS a cop

and

is ready to give us results on a daily basis.

[Sir Tornado]

I choose to assume that everyone is following the forum rules, and use that to guide my play. I don't think it's an unreasonable policy.

Selfhammering as cop is a reason to be banned from future games, not a reason to be coddled.

We don't live in a utopia. (besides, he/she/it didn't actually self hammer, just threatened to)

btw, I don't have any problem with giving Puta Puta the win if he/she/it is a jester. If you are, just claim it, and I'll hammer you if needed. It will be much better to the town that way if that is the case.

[Sir Tornado]

My view is that anyone who is self-voting must fall into one of three categories:
(1) Scum

Ok... just curious, why would scum want to self vote again?

[Sir Tornado]

Xylthixm, have you heard of Village Idiots?

[Sir Tornado]

Xyl, that is alright when you have a nobler cause of improving general standard of play, and get people to adhere to rules and stuff like that, but I not in this game to do that; I am here to win this game.

[Sir Tornado]

And, Seraphim, I am STILL waiting for your answer to this question

[Sir Tornado]

Incidentally, I don't agree that self voting is always bad Xyl. I self voted myself at the end of this game, so I am not sure about your general policy (not saying Puta Puta self voting in this case is not bad though)

[Sir Tornado]

Why OGML? iamausername?

[Sir Tornado]

i mean its a pretty good play if your scum because its too early in the game for a counter claim cause the real copp wouldn't want to out himself this early especially with no investigation results,,,,

That's a horrible play regardless of alignment (even for a jester).

vote Seraphim

Safe route?

[Sir Tornado]

unvote
vote xyl

I agree with BM.

[Sir Tornado]

Killa Seven, want to add something?

Puta Puta, do you think mafia is played the way you are playing right now? We have 20+ pages so far, don't you have an opinion on anything in the game so far?

[Sir Tornado]

Mod, please find a replacement for me, sorry

Ok, so we got him/her/it out of the way now.

So... Killa Seven... you might begin by explaining how your situation isn't much different than Puta Puta's.

[Sir Tornado]

My vote's not going to do anything much while OGML is away, and I know k7 can be more helpful than he has been so far in this game. Let's get this wagon a-rollin'.

I find it interesting you are explaining all of this.

This observation is mainly for post-game purposes.

[Sir Tornado]

This is what originally drew my attention and vote. His reason for the FoS is total bull, and the fact that he FoSes when he hasn't got a vote out is something I find really scummy, in that noncomittal, don't want to leave a paper trail sort of way.

It wasn't a "total bull" reason. Scum are more likely to see traps where none exist because they are more likely to be more suspicious and paranoid than townies about traps.

Defends his move onto the Hoopla wagon in 157 based on a total falsehood, then corrects himslf in 158 regarding the facts but seemingly doesn't think this should change his defense in the slightest. Also, note this line from 157:

This is patently untrue. Only the last line of my post 157 was based on the falsehood (which I corrected in my next post). The rest is still valid.

Its so convenient for scum when someone doesn't answer a query of theirs, they get to just sit around doing nothing all day long except repeating that they're waiting for something.

I think I established later that I was too busy at that time?

Unabashed buddying up to CKD.

You obviously don't know I make comments like this frequently in mafia games. Also, I'll keep this in mind whenever you say you think someone is town later on.

This is an incredibly ridiculous reason to attack BM.

How on earth can you view that as an attack? I of course had no idea whether BM posts more smileys as townie or scum, I just remember he used to do a lot of that some time ago. I was trying to see if he would consciously put more smileys in his posts after that -- which he didn't.

Wow what an awesome excuse for scummy play, you're "trying to be ambiguous" so you don't get nightkilled. I call shenanigans.

Perhaps you want to see my last 3-4 games?

Wait wait wait, didn't you just make a sidelong attack on BM yourself for not using enough smileys? I don't think there can be anything more utter crap than that, yet here you go attacking people who attack BM. Thats really strange.

See above about the "attack".

You explained it based on a false premise, then you quickly corrected yourself in regards to the premise but did not correct your explanation.

Again, see (a bit more) above.

It should be clear by now that Sir T and tubby216 are scum together.

So... are you saying it did not happen like that on page 15 and 16? How would you describe events on page 15/16 in a single post then?

[Sir Tornado]

"I'm playing badly because I don't want to be night killed"

I never said I was playing "badly". I just meant that I wasn't trying to be "obviously" townie which I usually am (regardless of my role) early on in the game.

[Sir Tornado]

Finally, finally votes for Seraphim, I guess he felt that he had left enough "waiting for your answer" posts to point back to later if this vote was ever questioned.

Ok, but you fail to mention that I unvoted Seraphim on that very page. So, enlighten me, why would I trying to develop a false and weak reasoning to vote Seraphim for 15 pages, vote him (so that I could have enough "left him questions" posts later on to point to) and then vote someone else on the same page? No one actually questioned that vote between me voting him and unvoting him either, so how does that fit into your theory?

[Sir Tornado]

Therefore, not playing obviously townie lowers the town's chances of lynching scum, and therefore lowers the town's chances of winning. What do you call that? I call it bad play.

Not badly enough to get myself lynched...

An unrelated point for my future reference: I really don't like the idea of someone playing deliberately ambiguous; it's bad for the town. "I'm playing badly because I don't want to be night killed" (or whatever SirT said) doesn't sit very well with me.

But wait, doesn't that depend on my alignment? I mean, if I am scum, wouldn't me playing badly be advantageous to the town? Do you KNOW I am town?

[Sir Tornado]

If you're scum, it's good play. If you're town, it's bad play.

How is it a good play if you are scum? Didn't your scenario end up with the player getting lynched?

Or did you mean good play for the town?

In my experience, scum often go to the gallows convinced that the case against them is bullshit and they would have done the exact same thing as town.

lol

[Sir Tornado]

I'm assuming that if you're scum, playing "obviously townie" is not an option

It certainly is on D1. Not the entire game perhaps.

[Sir Tornado]

Sorry about this. I'll post tonight.

[Sir Tornado]

Sorry about this. I'll post tonight.

[Sir Tornado]

I am going through a period of acute depression (academics) please tolerate me for sometime. Not all the inactivity is down to that though. I generally play in bouts of concentrated activity with a brief period of inactivity, but I agree that this recent inactivity was way too excessive.

Read a few of the pages I was inactive in, and skimmed the rest (will read them in detail while I type this out), the things strike me:

Re: Tubby PM quotation thing -- I don't agree with BM, I think it is a null tell. Agree with Xyl on this one.

Re: Der Hammer -- Miller claim isn't scummy, but his subsequent posts are. Especially the one where he unvotes himself very quickly. Also, I disagree with Xyl about dealing with Miller issue, agree with Vollkan regarding that. I don't see why Seraphim votes Der Hammer after the claim, is it because he disbelieves the claim, or agrees with Der Hammer that miller should be lynched?

Either ways, I think DH falls in the Puta Puta category, he's marked himself out for the town now. No need to rush through and lynch him immediately if a better option is available, but no way he should be allowed to survive till end game.

As far as Claus goes, we're all agreeing to completely ignore Gimbo's fuckery and give him a clean slate, right? I'm pretty sure that is the way to go.

No, No, NO. That would be the worst play EVER.

And, Claus, please claim immediately. Or, rather, confirm Puta Puta's claim.

Oh, forget it...

Mod, Please replace me

. I can't bring myself to do this anymore. Apologies, but I simply can't carry on in my current mind frame. If you think we are too close to the deadline, then replace me at the start of D2, that would be fine too. Sorry all, if someone wants me to answer any of my plays during the course of the game, please ask right now.

[Sir Tornado]

The quandary is that some people (see Xyl's posts for a better explanation) have a view that miller claims are innately scummy and should be auto-lynchable offences . Others (eg. me) think that miller claims should be treated with doubt and so on, but not an autolynch.

IMO, you should treat a miller claim as a player who is unreadable. You don't rush to lynch him because the player is unreadable, but you don't allow the player to live until the end of the game, where you want to have as few unknown quantities as possible. Claimed miller is, thus a very good target for vig if the vig is taking a shot based on his hunch.

Ecto's plan (case 2) is good too. But, only as long as the plan isn't out in the open. Once it is in the open, like it is now, it's effect is negated IMO. You need a town filled with experienced as well as good players to carry that out.

I like my vote where it is. Der Hammer's lack of actual content until he was attacked leads me to believe he is active-lurking. His miller claim smells. I'd be a lot less willing to lynch him if his miller claim had come closer to the beginning of the game rather than when he was attacked. Instead, it only comes when he is attacked. Therefore, I like my vote.

The problem with that reaction to a Miller claim is, that Miller is a unusual claim for mafia to make in this situation. It's a big gambit, in that it may not work. If he wanted one that worked, he would have claimed doctor, something that would make absolutely sure that he survived today (or outed the real doctor). The BW against Der Hammer wasn't too big for him to have to claim (unless he got a massive panic attack), and he could have easily absorbed that pressure successfully. That's the problem with his claim being false.

At this stage, it doesn't matter if the claim is true or false though. Der Hammer has managed to separate himself from the rest of the town with the claim. That's good enough if he is mafia. He won't (or, rather shouldn't) survive for long. So, in case he is mafia, he's in the bag.

[Sir Tornado]

Don't like this directing of the vig. Seems like Mafia trying to get a vig to do their dirty work.

Er... mafia would want to NK a a person who claims a miller... why exactly?

This is a ridiculous argument for not lynching someone. Fos: Sir Tornado

Did you read the preceding paragraph?

That's

the reason.

[Sir Tornado]

OGML: You accuse me of being scum in this post, I respond to most of your accusations in this post, and you just ignore it and go after Tubby for the time being. Why?

What do you think about Seraphim? (don't accuse me of deflecting attention from my BW here)

[Sir Tornado]

Also, if I am going to be lynched, I want Shanba and YoS to put their reasons for suspecting me on the record right now.

[Sir Tornado]

Tubby needed a wagon to straighten him out.

You ignore that post again

[Sir Tornado]

As for Sera, I'll join the suggesting vig strategies party and say he'd be a pretty optimal vig choice. Recently, he's done a lot of wagoning lurkers and nothing.

And, wondering how well this sits with your accusation of me trying to set up his lynch. Also, wondering whether you still think I and Tubby are scum buddies (if so, why would you want to "straighten him out"?)

[Sir Tornado]

Either he is scummy and should be lynched, or he isn't scummy and therefore not "in the bag". Pick one.

You mean something along the lines of:

Guys, I think we've got a decision to make, right here, right now. Either we lynch Ectomancer immediately, or we trust him completely forever. THOSE ARE THE ONLY OPTIONS.

?

He is unreadable to me in terms of alignment based on that miller claim. Not sufficiently scummy to lynch yet. Also, by "in the bag", I meant to indicate that there was no way he could be scum and get away with this forever. It's the same scenario as with Puta Puta. I don't see anyway he is going to live until end game after that claim, so I am not too concerned to lynch him right now.

[Sir Tornado]

So, if I understand your position correctly, he is scummy enough that we will lynch him eventually but not scummy enough to lynch today. Is that correct?

No. I meant that the danger in not lynching him today is very minimal. And, I have already told why there is a good chance he may not be scum in post 829.

[Sir Tornado]

Let's change the question. If, through some amazing miracle, DH stayed exactly as scummy as he is now for the rest of the game, at what point would you be willing to lynch him?

I'd prefer the vig option. Even if you forget that he has claimed, he still is a good N1 vig target (although there would be a few others in the same bracket as him, like Killa Seven, Natirasha, Sensfan, etc) unless the vig has spotted someone genuinely scummy and wants to bump them off.

And, things would still change even if DH remains the same. Other people's alignment will be revealed; their interactions with DH will be taken into account, etc; so your scenario is almost impossible to achieve.

[Sir Tornado]

Sir T, if you are battling despression, then this game isnt for you....sorry.

Mod, Please replace me.

Shouldn't I play until I get replaced?

[Sir Tornado]

Unvote, in light of a replacement being found.

You haven't explain why you voted me in the first place though. You accuse me of being scum and asking the vig to do mafia's dirty work for them, but why would mafia want to NK a claimed miller? This was the sole basis of your vote, which, you have now hastily withdrawn under another pretext without answering why.

[Sir Tornado]

One more thing, your unvote is totally baseless. I am not being voted because I am lurking (or, atleast you are not doing that for that reason). It isn't a pressure vote to get me posting. So, why the hell do you unvote because I am being replaced? When you already KNEW I was going to be replaced when you put that vote on me in the first place? What is your logic here? Am I suddenly less scummy to you because I am being replaced?

[Sir Tornado]

Fair enough YoS.

[Sir Tornado]

In this case, mafia would want a Vig to kill the claimed miller (me), sooner or later, to stop them getting into endgame where they could be a threat, and to save the mafia a kill which could be more productive on someone else.

Is this some kind of joke? Explain

how

you can be a threat to mafia in endgame. This is the first time I am hearing this theory.

And, no you don't become less scummy when your replaced, but I would at least like to give the replacement the benefit of a couple of posts before the vote is renewed.

What for? Considering you are voting me for a complete BS reason.

And now just laying down to Yos, not even trying to rebutt any of the points made? Are you just accepting that you are rightfully someones 2nd best lynch?

Why on earth would I rebut completely valid points? The only thing he is wrong in his post is:

I don't have that many concrete reasons to suspect you, honestly, but then again I don't have much data to work from since you haven't posted all that much,

because, believe it or not, I have commented on everything so far in the game except the lurker hunt. Also, for all the talk about me being not participating, this is my 63rd post. CKD has 31, Shanba has 28 OGML has 48, YoS2 has 56, Natirasha has 19, Hoopla has 35, Der Hammer has 27, Tubby has 56 and Ecto has 43. Only Xyl (96) and BM (118) and have more posts than me. And, it's not like I have been saying nothing in my posts either. So, it's not exactly 1 in 10 as YoS2 says.

Is my starting point. Yours was especially bad, because you unvoted at the same time. The impression I got was that you were unwilling to get your hands dirty. I mean, I understand your response, it's just I don't wee why there should be any threshold at all on the level of scumminess required for a vote on page 4, just after the random voting stage. Especially given that earlier, he had voted Hoopla seriously for a nl vote - a vote that was weak enough for him to retract fairly quickly. One explanation that I can envisage is that he did not see Seraphim's post as being as scummy as I did, but in that case I don't really see why he FoSsed at all.

I don't think both of use thought Seraphim was scummy for the same thing... my reason wasn't nearly strong enough to cast vote on him.

And then, he never commits. It takes him ages to actually come to any conclusions about who he does want dead. He seems like he does not want to be noticed, and that always makes me want to look closer.

Can you point out ANY game where I actually wanted anyone desperately dead on D1? I am a very poor scum hunter, although I do tend to figure out who the scum are, by the end game, I just fail at getting them lynched; as seen by my abysmal record as town. (2 wins in about 20 odd games). I tend not to go on accusing anyone on D1, because frankly speaking I have no clue on who is scum on D1. Don't try to twist this and say I do not scum hunt on D1 (this is mainly to OGML and Xyl).

I find it ironic that Sir T is far more active now than at any point since the beginning of the game.

This isn't true :p I was much more active on pages 17/18/19.

[Sir Tornado]

unvote
vote Claus

I am sorry, but if you are not cop, my defence of Puta Puta does not hold good.

[Sir Tornado]

unvote

vote Der Hammer

I revise my opinion. We should lynch Der Hammer right now. Ignore his miller claim, which is not possible to be confirmed anyway, and look at this general behaviour. His play, especially in the last 2 pages is scummy as hell.

[Sir Tornado]

As for the "the only way I support Puta's replacement if he confirms the cop claim and posts results every morning". I find this weird given your reaction to the Puta wagon before the claim. And I don't agree with it anyway.

Here is my counter offer: I will confirm/deny Puta's claim D2

. If that doesn't cut it for you, sorry.

Fair enough. However, I will probably not be around on D2, so please keep your word.

[Sir Tornado]

Sure, but the way I have seen some people personal attack others in this “game”…I don’t think it is for you. I am not talking about just this game, I am talking about the whole site. Sorry for your issues.

This is the only game I am in right now on this site anyway.

[Sir Tornado]

OGML you are starting piss me off by ignoring my questions. The same goes to you to Der Hammer.

[Sir Tornado]

Ok, let's try this again: What does everyone think of Der Hammer?

[Sir Tornado]

Ecto, I am not getting replaced yet for the same reason BM and Killa Nine aren't.

And I got a "bye" because... well, there aren't any strong reasons to lynch me. Most of them are based on my play in first 4-5 pages - which I acknowledge is indeed bad, some (YoS) because they think I am posting reasons, and because some (*cough*OGML*cough*) have been tunnel-visioning me on some blow-ups of flimsy reasons (about which they refuse to answer questions when asked repeatedly). I can accept getting voted if you read only my first 20 or so posts, but voting me after reading all my posts at this point is ridiculous - unless you are Xyl and voting on some "principle". Ironically, he isn't.

[Sir Tornado]

EBWOP: In my last post

...some (YoS) because they think I am

not

posting

much

...

[Sir Tornado]

I somehow missed this:

So you defended Puta for his claim, but now you don't believe his claim anymore? If you believed his claim then, why do you think I have to confirm/deny it now?

I didn't say I 100% believed Puta Puta's plan, BUT, I felt, that the optimal play at that time was to believe Puta Puta's plan for the time being, provided Puta Puta agreed to my request (of claiming investigation everyday) because it was easy to confirm it. Lynching a claimed cop on D1 is never a good play by town.

You have to confirm/deny it because, if you aren't a cop, then you cannot claim investigation results everyday, which makes it impossible to confirm you. And, there really isn't any reason for a vanilla townie to claim cop; however, there is plenty of reason for scum to do so. There is a chance to expose the real cop, in case he decides to counter claim (which, incidentally isn't a good cop play in a large game on D1)

[Sir Tornado]

substitute "claim" for "plan" in my last post.

[Sir Tornado]

/gets prodded

[Sir Tornado]

Under normal circumstances, I'd agree, but Puta Puta was a troll who joined games specifically to fuck with them. It's entirely possible that he didn't even read his role PM, and even if he did, I doubt his choice of claim had any particular connection to it.

I could find only one more game when I checked his posting history (this was while he was still in the game). IIRC, he hadn't done something as drastic as this in that one.

[Sir Tornado]

FoS anyone who posts just to say "prod recieved, I'll post later".

...

Puta Puta was a confirmed Gimbo alt.

Gimbo? Links/game numbers to some of this guys deeds?

[Sir Tornado]

I know I haven't made a case on you - but I think you're the next best lynch after Sir T, whose wagon seems to have died. These thoughts stem from others' cases and we need people like me to agree with some of them if a lynch is to be made. I think Claus' 870 has decent points on you, and reading through your isolation posts and then again in contrast with the game I can see you being scum.

Excellent time for you to tell me why I am a good lynch. Since I don't see any of your post saying why. I am actually surprised I am your prime suspect. You never mentioned it before. The only thing you have said about me at all in this game is: "I agree with OGML" -- and then in the same post said you were happy with OGML lynch too. (followed by vote on Sensfan)

[Sir Tornado]

I know I haven't made a case on you - but I think you're the next best lynch after Sir T, whose wagon seems to have died.

And, yeah, this is something that really ticks me off. If you think someone is scum,

vote for them

and try to convince others to do so too. Keeping quiet and just saying "I think X is scum, but I am not voting for him because the wagon died" without trying to push that wagon when we are an entire week away from deadline is just pathetic. OGML is at least sticking to his guns and still insisting that I am scum (although not doing a terribly good job of it; perhaps due to the holidays), but what are you doing? Apart from following other people?

And, note, that a considerable amount of OGML's accusations against me were based on the premise that I was "setting up a Seraphim lynch". You agreed with that. Why the hell are you voting for Seraphim now then? And, note that you are doing that while maintaining that he is not your number one suspect, and you are voting him only due to the deadline. Can you please decide who you are going to pretend is scummy or not before accusing and being consistent at that?

[Sir Tornado]

So we should all be stubborn and stick to who we think is scum? This seems suboptimal for the town. If you'd like an excuse for my play I'm more than happy to share what my plan has been.

And it's optimal to not make a case against your main suspect at all?

At the start of D1 I voted no-lynch which helped myself and others generate reads on other plays and allowed a lively start to the game. The game then plateaued and died due to lurking and replacements. I made cases on players - as did others, but the fact so much of the town (yourself including for a while) remained inactive we weren't going anywhere. So I decided lurker-hunting was the most viable way to kickstart play again so we had a read on more players - and more importantly had more opinions in the game so current conversation wasn't being dominated by a smaller group.

What are you trying to say here? Is this some sort of rhetoric you are using to try to bull shit your way into some position? Because it certainly doesn't answer any question I asked you, most importantly the following:

- Why haven't you made any case against me yet?
- You explain that the only time you attacked me (if it can be called an attack) was in a post where you agreed with OGML, followed by you saying you were happy with OGML lynch too. Anything you want to say for yourself on this?

I'd rather lynch you as it saves us getting a new player into the game. I think it's very plausible you were 'setting him up', but also upon looking at Seraphim closer now, I could see him as scum. I'd wager to say one of you is scum - but not both.

So, let me get this straight

- You say I am your main suspect
- You think only one of Seraphim and me can be scum
- You vote for Seraphim because there are no takers for my wagon.

Excellent.

[Sir Tornado]

Player A thinks Player B is scum. Player B thinks player C is scum. Because A thinks B is scum, does this give A a town read on C due to what B thinks of C?

No. But only if he has a case on Player C independently. If he is simply going to say "I agree with Player B, so I think Player C is scum", then following that with "I am happy with a player B lynch too"; it is certainly dodgy.

Also,

So, let me get this straight

- You say I am your main suspect
- You think only one of Seraphim and me can be scum
- You vote for Seraphim because there are no takers for my wagon.

Excellent.

Do you agree?

[Sir Tornado]

In a D1 situation similar to this you have two main suspects who are about equal probability of being scum in your mind. You're getting a possible power-role read from one if he isn't scum, and a probable vanilla/weak power-role if he isn't scum from the other.

Both have a few votes already. Who do you vote for, and who do you want to claim?

In that case, I make a case on the person I suspect the most (that would be me for you at the moment) and try to push people to vote that person, instead of just quoting a bunch of people and saying "I agree with what he says, vote X, even though I would prefer Y to be lynched"

In a round about way. I'd be satisfied with a Seraphim lynch or you, as I think I'd get a decent read on the other who isn't lynched. I think you're oversimplifying though.

This is the single most scummiest thing you have said today. In a nutshell, if you are scum, you are saying you get a chance to push 2 mislynches on first two days.

[Sir Tornado]

I didn't ask you to reiterate what you've already said in 924.

You asked what I would do. I have told you exactly what I would do.

Just because I find you slightly scummier doesn't mean Seraphim isn't a good lynch too. Other factors weigh in also. For example, claimed role, helpfulness, activity, power-role possibility...etc doesn't necessarily always relate directly to scumminess, but are factors to consider when lynching.

Neither of us have claimed anything. Neither of us are giving hints of power roles right now. (note: I am not claiming or denying anything about my role, just saying I haven't given any indication of it yet. This sentence does not point to anything except what it says.)

The rest of your sentence, is just mumbo jumbo which doesn't actually mean anything but makes you look very clever as it doesn't apply here.

[Sir Tornado]

and what make seraphim so much more scummier than anybody else?

He hasn't played much is one reason. His early posts were dodgy too. His vote on Der Hammer looked opportunistic and a bit wrong when he made it. He has been trying to actively avoid posting lately as he's come under pressure. All good reasons to suspect him.

[Sir Tornado]

A week is not a long time in this game. Given the deadline, not voting someone you think is scum is entirely rational as town.

I disagree with this. It gives scum a good excuse to get someone lynched without making a case on that person on D1; and then go back to the person they were trying to set the lynch of originally on D2. A week is a long time in mafia game.

[Sir Tornado]

Do you base all your decisions and votes solely on scumminess?

That's a silly question if you have read my posts; especially the ones about Puta Puta and later Der Hammer when he first claimed. Seraphim hasn't claimed yet. There is nothing to go by. And, you are trying to distort the situation on that front in your post 932 by hinting there is.

[Sir Tornado]

We'll continue this later. I get this urge to burst firecrackers right now.

[Sir Tornado]

How long does it take to convince the majority of the town that someone should be lynched, have them claim a power role, and then convince the majority of the town that a second person should be lynched? Do you think all that can be done in orderly fashion in a week? If we take four days to decide on the first candidate and then they claim power, do you think we can get a good second candidate in the last three days? What about five and two?

Why not two weeks? how about one and a half week or two and a half weeks?

Hoopla has never made a case against me today. He's just saying I am his no 1 suspect without allowing me to defend myself. And, he's voting Seraphim at the same time. Tell me, is this behaviour acceptable? And, he's saying that he thinks either Seraphim and me are scum; although not together. So, if Seraphim comes up town, that gives him the license to attack me tomorrow saying that I was his number one suspect all along.

I asked him to make a case against me twice yesterday (RL yesterday) -- he told me to stop repeating myself after the second time; and he still refuses to heed my request. If I am his main suspect, let's hear why.

In his 665, he agrees with OGML's 549 but then adds:

I think OGML has a good case on Sir T, however, the thing that irks me is that the weight of the case appears in posts 400+, well after the initial vote for Sir T by OGML.

After that, he makes absolutely no mention of his suspicion towards me,

not even

when he actually votes me; until the point he unvotes me and votes Seraphim.

So, this begs a question, why am I his main suspect in this game, based on a case -- which isn't his -- which he thinks is irksome in some aspects; which is based on me setting up the lynch of the person he thinks is second scummiest in the game? Isn't this stretching credulity?

And, Xyl, I want to know your own thoughts on OGML's 549.

OGML is needs to respond to this post. I know he is online quite a bit due to him being in scumchat often. Also, to Hoopla's criticism (quoted above) to his 549.

[Sir Tornado]

Hoopla: I'mma defend mahself!
Sir T: But I'll attack you!
Magisterrain: I'm here!
Xyl: But, do we need more time?
Sir T: No, we need to lynch Hoopla!

Right... and I am not even voting him

[Sir Tornado]

I'm just trying to make it easier for those of us who don't want to spend a good hour reading a single page of the game.

Seriously, a kindergarten kid will take less time than that to read the last page.

[Sir Tornado]

I'm exaggerating to prove a point.

Perhaps the time spent might be spent better actually reading and interpreting what went on in the last page better?

[Sir Tornado]

Hoopla, if you think it is a great case, perhaps you might want to respond to my response to it, since OGML isn't doing it?

[Sir Tornado]

On a side-note are you still seeking replacement or sticking it out now?

Had I not asked to be replaced out already, I wouldn't want to right now; but I understand many of you may have unvoted me/changed your opinion on me due to me asking to replace out, and it would be in bad taste to stay, so I am still being replaced out when The Fonz manages to find replacements, and he has to find replacements for 3 players, so it is very unlikely I would have got replaced out on D1 even if I hadn't been posting so much. Obviously, BM and Xyzzy who aren't posting should get replaced out first.

[Sir Tornado]

I'll make a post on this very soon.

Cheers.

My optimum choice has shifted recently - I think you'd be pretty valuable if you are town-aligned, moreso than Der Hammer or Seraphim which to me is important in a D1 lynch. I have no problems with you staying, infact I'd encourage you to do so.

Don't think so. Asking for replacement is an out of game action. If someone is unvoting me because of it (and, a few people have said they were because I asked for replacement) then I cannot take advantage of that; even if I don't genuinely need to be replaced at a later time before the replacement is found. It's unethical.

[Sir Tornado]

I am not really satisfied by that defense of seph. All I see is someone about to be lynched, cheering the lynch of the runner up. Not a townie giving his hostest opinions about the other players, which was what I expected.

Actually, yes, I feel this point points to scumminess of Seraphim. But it also applies to Der Hammer.

What clinches it for Der Hammer is, though that he has done this twice; he voted for me due to a completely crap reason when I was competing with him for the lynching spot; and now he's changed it to Seraphim when he's the competition.

And, I am not replacing out due to discussions with The Fonz.

[Sir Tornado]

I dislike this more than someone claiming certainties on scum, particularly when Sens lurked then posted bits and pieces - it was a simple case to put together.

I was referring to the tone of his attack. Besides, only people with tinted glasses can see this as scum tell. Buddying isn't scum tell unless it is done on a regular basis in the game. It's of no use if I have one or two comment posted somewhere in 70 pages which can be interpreted as a "buddying up" post.

This quote is bad, firstly the bit about overconfidence when read in conjunction on his thoughts of CKD. Secondly, the ambiguous playstyle comment is a rubbish way to evade to scrutiny. It's essentially a cloak where you can attribute anything someone finds scummy about you to your playstyle, saying you were meant to do it. You retort to this with a predictable 'check my meta' reply;

To be fair, I think the rest of the case/replies were valid and possibly being misconstrued by both parties. My main beef is the ambiguous play-style comment and meta-defense which I hope doesn't resurface.

The "ambigious" style applied only to my very early posts. From the point where I posted on page 15/16 till now on, I reverted back to my original play style. Thus, the meta fits. If you ignore my early comments and concentrate only on the posts I made from page 15/16, I will come across as rather townish; and this is how I generally look on D1 no matter what my affiliation is. The first few pages were an experimentation which failed (rather disastrously). And, btw, the "check my last 3-4 games" was response to OGML doubting my claim that I get NKed in games often (and I get pissed off about it). It has nothing to do with meta; it's just hard cold fact.

I don't think this topic warranted a page long debate when I don't have my vote on you now.

It did because you insisted I was your numero uno suspect; without having any reason to believe so (from my POV)

[Sir Tornado]

So this is either Der Hammer giving up as a true miller, on Der Hammer laying a bunch of moves to like like a giving up miller.

Even if Der Hammer is a real miller, it is unconfirmable. So, we can simply ignore that claim altogether and focus only on his general play.

[Sir Tornado]

@Hoopla: Is this correct? As in, have you anywhere presented an argument for why Sir T is scummy enough to be your number 1?

He did say "I agree" to OGML's case, but ignored my response to that till now. When I asked him to respond to my response to OGML's case he agreed with, he came out and said something to the effect that I was not his number one suspect any more.

I can't decide exactly what to make of Hoopla here. He is way too inconsistent and sits on the fence too much for my liking. Definitely not going to vote for him today, but he's in my top 3 with Der Hammer and Seraphim on current form.

[Sir Tornado]

[quote="Sir Tornado]
He did say "I agree" to OGML's case, but ignored my response to that till now.
[/quote]

By that, I meant till RL yesterday. He replied on the previous page.

[Sir Tornado]

Bleh, Sir T still needs to die, but I´ve got to start being realistic with how this day is going to end.

unvote

OGML

I am not going to participate in this game any longer as long as OGML continues to ignore my response to his case and the rest of you don't care anything about it. Have a good day.

[Sir Tornado]

I meant

vote OGML

[Sir Tornado]

Given you only have two votes on you, the most likely explanation for people not caring about your response is simply that they don't care about his case on you to start with. Is he scummy enough to vote over e.g. a claimed miller at this point?

At this point, I don't care about it. I have asked him about 4 times, and he's ignored me every single time.

[Sir Tornado]

Um...you're almost certanly not going to be lynched today, Sir T. Why don't you comment on the two wagons that might actually happen instead of worring about OGML?

I am not going to participate in this game any longer as long as OGML continues to ignore my response to his case and the rest of you don't care anything about it. Have a good day.

[Sir Tornado]

But...there's no reason for you to do that, Sir T. The reason no one is too worried about OGML's case on you right now is because it dosn't really have anything to do with the only issue pro-town people should be worried about now, which is "who do we lynch today before deadline?".

If you don't replace out, since you just said you want to keep playing, then we'll talk about it tommorow. Right now we don't have time to waste on side issues like that.

It's about having some basic sense of decency to respond to someone who is trying to respond to your accusations of him being scum. If the town doesn't care about OGML not having it, then I don't care about what happens in this game anymore. Do whatever you like.

[Sir Tornado]

frustrated townie

Try "completely pissed off".

[Sir Tornado]

Er, no OGML. It's not an ad homiem because I am not using that argument to discard your case against me.

Yos2: There's a reason I want OGML to reply me today, because I think there is a decent chance of me being NKed and OGML being given a free pass for his behaviour tomorrow.

[Sir Tornado]

I predict OGML to start accusing CKD as my scumbuddy following his post 1031.

[Sir Tornado]

My experience with xyl is that he lives by his metas. So far, I know that he definitely plays by these metas:

Lynch all lurkers
Lynch all self-voters
(anti-town play is scummy)
Do not bus scum partners

This is unhelpful, and unwanted on D1.

[Sir Tornado]

OGML was a blatant vig right after he killed me. Look at his comments at start of day 2. I remember him saying he was surprised that there was only one kill that night. Shanba was the only player I had confidence in after that, and our chances went when he died on N2. I had high hopes from Xyl, who is a very good player, but I was put out by his idealistic view on playing mafia on D1. I like OGML, but I am still deeply unhappy with his play on D1. What do you do when you are sure a person is town and refuses to listen to anything you say and accuses you of being scum for non existent reasons? I don't remember how I felt about Yos on D1, but I knew something was wrong when he wasn't killed early on in the game. If I were scum, I would have taken out YoS on N1.