Mini 703 - A Roccisi Autumn - Over

[gorckat]

Is there any positive reason to lurk?

I just took of my tie. If you can convince my boss that playing mafia will help me lease up an apartment building, then by all means, I'll post more

When I have an hour or two, I'll be posting heavily here and in my other game (which is also suffering because brand new buildings full of vacant apartments seem to not make their owners happy in a down economy).

[Rage]

Oooh.

Now, I'm not saying I believe the "oh, that? That was meant for another game!" excuse he's got going on right now, but I don't think there's enough evidence for me to believe he's scum

If he did lie then it is likely he is scum... why would town do this and then lie about it?

If he's lying, he's got an incredibly weak and bad defense, and if he's town he's playing stupidly. I was trying to say that he might have thought he was getting away with quoting Shakespeare until he was called out on it, and even though he was continuing not to be much help, I'm not 100% positive that he's scum. More like 70%-80% sure.

Now, that doesn't mean I won't put my vote on him if Town reaches (or mostly) a consensus, that just means I won't vote on him right now.

To be honest, I'm not sure who is suspicious to me anymore, because everyone that I thought was scum seems to have some sort of an excuse.

[Puta Puta]

Merciful heaven,
Thou rather with thy sharp and sulphurous bolt
Splits the unwedgeable and gnarlèd oak
Than the soft myrtle; but man, proud man,
Dress'd in a little brief authority,
Most ignorant of what he's most assur'd—
His glassy essence—like an angry ape
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven
As makes the angels weep; who, with our spleens,
Would all themselves laugh mortal.

[chuckrock]

Is there any positive reason to lurk?

I just took of my tie. If you can convince my boss that playing mafia will help me lease up an apartment building, then by all means, I'll post more

When I have an hour or two, I'll be posting heavily here and in my other game (which is also suffering because brand new buildings full of vacant apartments seem to not make their owners happy in a down economy).

Sounds fine. At least you aren't quoting dead guys. I will say one thing, though. I have a job as well and I work pretty hard. It could get to be a pretty weak excuse by the voting deadline.

Just keep your computer tuned up. I'm guessing, that's the other potential lurk excuse, if used over time.

Good luck with the sales! Remember feature-benefit-close.

[darkdude]

I'm not 100% positive that he's scum. More like 70%-80% sure.

Then I assume you are >80% sure that Tarballs is scum?

[ThAdmiral]

Also I think you are lying. And the likelihood of you being jester is minimal since you passed on what (you thought) was a chance to self-lynch, so I'm definitely happy with you dying.

If there is a jester in closed setup then it is bastard modding. Not much can be done about that, so we shouldn't worry about it.

However, I find the fact that you keep pointing out the possibility of jester (this is the second time, I believe) to be more interesting. It doesn't do anything other than to make town potentially hesitate a lynch.

My second mention of it was basically putting that idea to rest. Are you seriously trying to suggest I am attempting to prevent a puta lynch?

People:

Have you actually read post #2? That tells us all the possible roles that may exist in this game, and I certainly can't find a Jester from that list. Even thinking about the possibility of a Jester is totally useless.

Also, I find it a bit silly how some people are already trying to find scum pairings. I'd say that we lynch whoever seems the scummiest, see if that person flips scum, and if they do,

then

go and find someone with a connection to the lynched scum.

To be honest...no I hadn't read post #2. My bad.

Also I totally agree with the second paragraph.

[darkdude]

My second mention of it was basically putting that idea to rest. Are you seriously trying to suggest I am attempting to prevent a puta lynch?

I'm not on that one any more since I see now that it's easy to miss these things. But I'll keep in mind that you did bring it up.

[TDC]

Vote Count

Puta Puta (4): ThAdmiral, darkdude, Brain of Wombat, Tarballs
Rage (2): MacavityLock, gorckat
Tarballs (1): Rage
Ectomancer (1): Korts

Not voting (4): tubby216, Puta Puta, chuckrock, Ectomancer

[ThAdmiral]

Righto.

[Korts]

unvote, vote: Puta Puta

You are deliberately playing anti-town, and are, regardless of alignment, going straight against your win condition. That is also against Site Rules. In this particular case, I'm willing to consider a policy lynch in lieu of a modkill.

mod:

will you consider modkilling Puta Puta for breaking site rules?

[gorckat]

unvote

On one hand I'd rather see Puta replaced than go down a man. On the other, replacements in these cases typically get a free ride.

[MacavityLock]

I'm still waiting on Ecto's responses to me.

Puta, your next post needs to explain why you showed up here with another Shakespeare quote. If you can't explain it and/or if he has in fact violated site rules, then I would absolutely be for either a modkill or a forced replacement. I'd much prefer to not have to go with a policy lynch.

[Korts]

It is clear that he doesn't have a PR in this game, nor is it likely he has one in the other one he's alluded to, therefore he's deliberately going against his win condition by acting anti-town, which is against the site rules. I'd rather not go with a replacement for the reasons stated by gorckat.

[darkdude]

mod: will you consider modkilling Puta Puta for breaking site rules?

Wouldn't this hint to what his win condition is, which would condemn/confirm him in a way that he shouldn't be?

[Korts]

deliberately playing in a way that may well get you lynched benefits neither town or mafia, and the jester role or a role with a similar win condition isn't included in the possible roles for this game.

[darkdude]

deliberately playing in a way that may well get you lynched

If he thinks WIFOM can save his ass, it's still a valid scum strategy in his opinion. Next thing you know, we'll be asking the mod to remove players for bad play.

[Korts]

Fair enough...

I think I should do a reread tomorrow. Expect a fairly sized post, consider that a promise.

[Ectomancer]

Straight forward for you McCavity, you were slinging mud at two players, and the one mud ball would invalidate the other, then as a player is nearing lynch, you back off and give them a clean slate so as to avoid any cupability if they turn up town. Your last statement goes along with this idea. "I'd much prefer to not have to go with a policy lynch. " ....but you will right?

[Puta Puta]

if you guys actually READ the quote, you'll realize that each one conveys something...they are not irrelevant and each one i've used is my response to what's going on in the game.

Okay?

[chuckrock]

if you guys actually READ the quote, you'll realize that each one conveys something...they are not irrelevant and each one i've used is my response to what's going on in the game.

Okay?

NO, not okay. If you have something to say, then speak in your own voice. We are already playing a game of "peel the onion." I'm not in the mood to redo Sophomore Literature.

Furthermore, if you feel you need to play games to get your point across, you are being obtuse and that makes me think you want confusion. Confusion is the tool of mafia.

[tubby216]

i'm sorry i was away emergancy tripp,, give me a few to catch up

[MacavityLock]

Straight forward for you McCavity, you were slinging mud at two players, and the one mud ball would invalidate the other

You're mischaracterizing my attacks as mudslinging. In separate instances, I had been questioning actions from both Tarballs and Rage. As of right now, I like Tarballs' answers much more than Rages'.

then as a player is nearing lynch, you back off and give them a clean slate so as to avoid any cupability if they turn up town.

I was expressing my displeasure with the Puta wagon. I had not been on it to that point, and wanted people to see the side that I was seeing: He made a mistake, not necessarily a scummy action in of itself, and I was worried we were going to lynch poorly because of it. Here when I say lynch poorly, I mean lynching for reasons having little to do with scumminess.

Speaking of which, I agree with chuckrock on his recent response to Puta. Puta, you don't have a PR. Be clear and complete with us or we (at least I) will regard it as scummy.

Your last statement goes along with this idea. "I'd much prefer to not have to go with a policy lynch. " ....but you will right?

I am generally against policy lynches. So, I guess in answer to your question, no. Give me a reason to lynch based on scumminess.

[Korts]

I owe this game proper effort. Unfortunately, I also owe the chemistry labs the minutes of an experiment for tomorrow.

[Ectomancer]

Explain the difference between asking for a modkill and a policy lynch for me McCavity?

[MacavityLock]

Explain the difference between asking for a modkill and a policy lynch for me McCavity?

With a policy lynch, we're guaranteed to waste a day, and it's all "part of the game." With a modkill, I don't know if we'll waste a day, and it would probably be punishment for breaking site rules, i.e. "outside the game."