Crackers! Mafia -- Game Over. See page 50

[vollkan]

I directly referred to "the use of it". And that is what I have been analysing (ie. by pointing out that you did not actually identify OMGUS. All you really attacked with that was the fact that DGB voted BM who was voting her, which isn't the least bit scummy.

Except...it was. BM was a scapegoat, quite obviously. It's just too suspicious how things played out.

"scapegoat" for what? And what was suspect about the way it "played out"?

And the use of it can mean anything. So far we've been in a semantics debate about the use of OMGUS.

You started this by saying that I had committed a false progression, which was rot because analysing your use of the label in argument is scum-hunting. There's no semantics involved.

[forbiddanlight]

You started this by saying that I had committed a false progression, which was rot because analysing your use of the label in argument is scum-hunting. There's no semantics involved.

Let's see, this whole OMGUS argument started with you or Korts arguing my use of it and saying it doesn't exist. this is totally semantics

"scapegoat" for what? And what was suspect about the way it "played out"?

I've explained why it was suspect how it played out.

as for scapegoat, BM was obviously the scapegoat for the scum to get a mislynch. (I misused the word, to be honest )

[Yosarian2]

Um, none of that is "proof" of anything. Not one of those posts was any kind of actual attack against CKD, or case against him, or pressure on him.

But they clearly show me dropping all suspicion of ckd?

Well, it certanly looks like you didn't want to go after him there in those posts. I'm not sure why you're quibbling over semantics here; you know what I mean.

Because you've never actually substantiated that claim.

You are now saying that I wasn't "acting in such a way that would actually raise the pressure on CKD," which is notably different from suggesting that I obviously and perceptibly stopped suspecting him. Are you backtracking?

You obviously and preceptibly stopped going after him, apparently in relation to his self-vote, and it looked weird to me, so I questioned it.

And so you're voting for me...why?

I think you said at some point that my case on you was all about your case on me. It is what I've posted the most about, but I don't recall you doing a heap of scum-hunting either and that is definitely a factor here.

Eh? What are you talking about? I've been scumhunting pretty consistatnly all game. In fact, the reason you're attacking me here is because I was scumhunting and trying to find out if you were scum. Contradiction much?

Most of your votes seem to have been made without a huge amount of consideration. That is, you've been going after easy targets and I've seen little evidence of you doing much to proactively catch scum.

Eh? All my votes have a lot of consideration behind them. If someone is an "easy target", that's generally because they look like scum.

I'm hoping it's clearer now why I say Yos' play was counter-intuitive as town. I'm bringing the posts up and demonstrating how they suggest that Yos' case on me was a reach. He's even said it was a leap himself.

Um...I don't see what those sentance have to do with each other.

On day 1, because I was agressivly scumhunting, I followed up on a possibility, based on some strange behavior from you and a pattern of action that seemed to imply a possible link to me. Clearly, I was wrong about you being linked to CKD. But how do you get from "Yos was scumhunting based on limited evidence on day 1 and therefore jumped to some conclusions" to "Yos's play is counterintuitive as town"?

For that matter, if I was scum, what would I stand to gain from speculating about a possible link day 1 between you and CKD?

Your case on me is a much, much bigger "reach" then my case on you ever was.

To me, it doesn't look like Yos followed a train of thought that is natural to scum-hunting - seeing point A (me unvoting ckd) and, exploring it, coming to a logical conclusion, point B (I was distancing from ckd). It looks more like he saw point A and then went about trying to connect it to a point B rather than organically arriving at it.

I saw point A, you unvoting CKD in a situation where, well, where it's totally counter-intuitive a townie would; point B, you then stopped putting pressure on CKD, and point C, you started trying to get other people to be less focused on CKD. I came to the possible conclusion that you didn't want CKD lynched at that point, for whatever reason; and even then I didn't assume you were scum, I considered that you might be linked to him, or you might have changed your mind and now thought he was town. How is that not a "natural train of thought" in scum-hunting?

I would really like to hear Raging Rabbit, Elmo, Tajo and FL comment on the cases on both me and Yos. With my case, I guess it'd be commenting on how valid Yos' points looked in context.

RR and Elmo said at the time that they didn't like my case on you. Which was fine; I certanly knew beforehand that I would take a lot of heat in suspecting someone that nearly everyone else in the game had already decided was town. But, you know, you can't worry about that when scumhunting.

[Adel]

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

votecount as of post 852

_{with 10 alive, 6 will lynch before deadline}

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

¬Korts:

1

:Raging Rabbit,
vollkan:

1

:roflcopter,
Yosarian2:

1

:destructor,
DrippingGoofball:

1

:forbiddanlight,

No Lynch:

none

not voting:

6

:DrippingGoofball, Elmo, Korts, populartajo, vollkan, Yosarian2

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

Day 3's deadline is December 26th at 12:28 (UTC)

Countdown timer to deadline

[vollkan]

Let's see, this whole OMGUS argument started with you or Korts arguing my use of it and saying it doesn't exist. this is totally semantics

It isn't semantics. You accused DGB of committing OMGUS, which she didn't do. The definition of OMGUS isn't a semantic issue at all - it goes to the fact that you can sling it around as an emotively-loaded label when, in reality, it is wrongly used. You also tried re-defining it yourself as "You are attacking me. Oh My God U Suck, I'm going to vote you" and relied on the apparent silence in DGB's post as to her reasons when, in context, the reasons for voting BM were manifestly obvious.

I've explained why it was suspect how it played out.

Well, no, actually you haven't. The only points you initially raised on DGB was the (wrong) OMGUS point, and the (context-ignorant) point about her not having explanations. You then later added a point about her seeming "too assured" (which is really just DGB's style of writing)

as for scapegoat, BM was obviously the scapegoat for the scum to get a mislynch. (I misused the word, to be honest )

More misuse of an emotional label. Hmm.

[Raging Rabbit]

Eh? What are you talking about? I've been scumhunting pretty consistatnly all game. In fact, the reason you're attacking me here is because I was scumhunting and trying to find out if you were scum. Contradiction much?

Not at all. I haven't seen you do much scumhunting, for one, mostly you went back and forth with des and vollkan a whole lot and went all out on BM when the opprotunity presented itself. You don't seem to be questioning that many people or really be actively looking for scum. Your questioning of des, as you yourself keep stating, isn't because he's a main suspect but because you want to argue with him some and figure the point out (which I don't see how you haven't yet, his explanation has been fully satisfactory imo even before he started repeating it ad infinitum per your request), so it's not much of an attack really. You don't seem to be putting your head out much.

RR and Elmo said at the time that they didn't like my case on you. Which was fine; I certanly knew beforehand that I would take a lot of heat in suspecting someone that nearly everyone else in the game had already decided was town. But, you know, you can't worry about that when scumhunting.

Canonizing yourself here, I dislike that. Scum have strong motive to attack the people everyone think are pro town, especially with possible docs around that make them bad kill choices, so as scum you would definitely want to cast him in a doubtful light. Also, again, you weren't really attacking him, just "questioning his motives", which puts less heat on you because you never really comitted yourself to the suspicion. Instead of taking heat for selflesslesly attacking des as you present it here, your aim could easily have been discrediting des some while giving off the appearance of scumhunting and being attentive.

I'm totally up for Yos' lynch, he's been my second suspect for a while now.

[Raging Rabbit]

Above quotes are Yos', btw.

Your case is basically this, correct me if I'm wrong: I made a case on Guardian (which was justified, just not based on the tell I thought it was); I made a case on BM based on a BS point of view in an argument, which I later retract on account of it being weak, but leave my vote because I can't find another place for it; "OMGUS" case on you, based on the fact that you seem to be pushing a weak case very hard; self-preservation vote on CKD (how's that even a point against me?); "bad logic" on the gut read on DGB.

You make a weak case on Guardian, than a really comfortable case on BM based on close to nothing which you never really seemed to believe, than you stay on BM after having admitted you don't have any real reason to suspect him anymoe, than you OMGUS me on a really weak basis which I quickly disprove and you unvote. So basically, you say a whole lot but actually do very little in terms of scumhunting, and seem to settle on targets just because they're a good place for you to keep your vote in at the time.

Also, jumping on rofl and uncovincing reasons for your town read on DGB are both mild scumtells.

Yos, what do you think of Korts?

[destructor]

Meanwhile, the debate between Yos and des doesn't seem to give proof of either one being scum. Yos seems to be slightly reaching, while des seems to be extrapolating Yos's scumminess from the fact that Yos is slightly reaching.

What about the rest of Yos' play?

This quote actually reminds me of the time you ignored ckd's reasons for voting rofl... selective commentary, or something... like your giving the discussion lip service without actually saying anything.

Which of the six I've named do you think would give us the most insight to the others' alignments if lynched?
That is, I think we should lynch one of those six and focus on narrowing that list down.

I actually dislike this post since it seems to be lining up lynches that could be completely off, and if enough of them are wrong, cause a win for des scum. Not sure if I think you are scum or not, but I think your idea was horrible.

It's some basic vote count analysis. Scum know who each other are and so it's usually safe to assume that their play will be influenced by how their buddies vote. I split my suspects into those on ckd's wagon and those off because I tend to think scum won't all vote together.

The list looks like this now:

Suspects from Group A:

Yosarian2
Korts
vollkan

Suspects from Group B:

SensFan

forbiddanlight
Elmo

I'm thinking a scum-team like Yos, Korts, {FL, Elmo} is most likely right now. I suppose FL and Elmo could be scum together and only one of Yos, Korts and vollkan is scum. If I'm wrong about this, I'll have to look at rofl, DGB and Tajo again but none of them have given me many reasons to think they're scum so far.

I know Elmo's having computer issues. I hope he's back before long because if he's town I'm sure he'll be extremely helpful.

[Korts]

than you stay on BM after having admitted you don't have any real reason to suspect him anymoe

You are pushing this point like it's especially damning. I like keeping my vote out somewhere, and usually when I don't have any leads it's my most recent suspect who gets the honor.

than you OMGUS me on a really weak basis which I quickly disprove and you unvote.

See, it didn't happen that way. You presented a weak case on me. I answered your points. You kept pushing on the same ill-founded reasons. So I voted you for pushing a crap case. There's no OMGUS there (and I'm not even taking into account that OMGUS doesn't exist in practise).

"Unconvincing reasons" for my town read on DGB were because someone asked me to explain my gut read. Gut reads are generally hard to explain; I gave it my best shot. I still don't see how that's a scumtell at all. Elaborate?

----------

And the use of it can mean anything. So far we've been in a semantics debate about the use of OMGUS.

Um, actually, vollkan's point was that you used the term OMGUS on something that obviously isn't.

Except...it was. BM was a scapegoat, quite obviously. It's just too suspicious how things played out.

Ironically, you seem to be making DGB the scapegoat for BM's lynch now. Hypocrisy is the best!

----------

Where's this "more likely" coming from? I'm not going to facetiously ask "Have you got numbers to prove it?". What I would like to know, though, is what makes the pro-town motive I gave any less reasonable than the pro-scum motives you've given. It's just like Yos's narrative thing.

I can't explain it much better than this: to me, as town, it makes sense to either take a BS case apart when I first see it, or if I want the pressured player to defend himself first, I don't even mention it. As scum, however, it would make sense to ever so slightly discredit said BS case without actually refuting it regardless of the pressured player's alignment. I guess my "proof" is my own hypothetical play in the situation.

Yes, and the best defence for scum is a strong offence. That works in two ways: 1) It lynches town, thus preventing their lynch and; 2) They avoid being accused of being inactive. Consistent good logic is a mild towntell, as I have said, but simply trying to stir things up doesn't in any way show consistently genuine thought.

Fair enough, I can respect your stance. It's irrelevant now anyway, since I'm not so convinced DGB is town anymore.

---------

What about the rest of Yos' play?

This quote actually reminds me of the time you ignored ckd's reasons for voting rofl... selective commentary, or something... like your giving the discussion lip service without actually saying anything.

To be honest, I haven't had the time to thoroughly go through your row. As much as I gathered, Yos starts out slightly reaching, but has a valid point in you apparently dropping much of the suspicion you had on CKD. He seems to be tunneling pretty much exclusively on you, though, and apart from an exchange with vollkan on the same topic, and the push on the obvious BM lynch, he hasn't really commented on anything else.

[destructor]

I've been scumhunting pretty consistatnly all game. In fact, the reason you're attacking me here is because I was scumhunting and trying to find out if you were scum. Contradiction much?

...

For that matter, if I was scum, what would I stand to gain from speculating about a possible link day 1 between you and CKD?

I call it a show. The whole idea was to make it look like you

were

scum hunting.

I saw point A, you unvoting CKD in a situation where, well, where it's totally counter-intuitive a townie would; point B, you then stopped putting pressure on CKD, and point C, you started trying to get other people to be less focused on CKD. I came to the possible conclusion that you didn't want CKD lynched at that point, for whatever reason; and even then I didn't assume you were scum, I considered that you might be linked to him, or you might have changed your mind and now thought he was town. How is that not a "natural train of thought" in scum-hunting?

I don't believe it's counter-intuitive to unvote to avoid a day ending sooner than it needs to. Point B and C never actually happened. *cue repeat*

[destructor]

Korts, do you like my list?

[Korts]

Korts, do you like my list?

Well, apart from me being on it?

I agree that forb deserves suspicion. The Yosarian-suspicion I agree with to a lesser extent. I don't really see vollkan as scummy, though, and Elmo hasn't contributed a lot to discussion (I am aware of his computer problems, which might in part explain that).

[destructor]

How about the people I left off? rofl, DGB and Tajo.

[Korts]

Tajo is deserving of some pressure. I don't remember anything much in terms of content from him; he's mostly supportive of others' opinions, mostly DGB's and yours.

DGB is null, bordering on slightly scummy. Her recent posting seems different from her earlier game play which gave me a pro-town impression.

rofl has only two posts this game-day. He should post something. Otherwise, his play has been pretty much pro-town.

[roflcopter]

i think yos and des are both town and this feud between them is a big waste of time

[Adel]

Death Scene

Yosarian2, an Inuit Mafia Godfather, has been killed

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

votecount as of post 864

_{with 9 alive, 5 will lynch before deadline}

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

¬Korts:

1

:Raging Rabbit,
vollkan:

1

:roflcopter,
DrippingGoofball:

1

:forbiddanlight,

No Lynch:

none

not voting:

6

:destructor, DrippingGoofball, Elmo, Korts, populartajo, vollkan,

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

Day 3's deadline is December 26th at 12:28 (UTC)

Countdown timer to deadline

[roflcopter]

geez, thanks for immediately proving me wrong, whoever did that

[roflcopter]

the killing of a mafia member proves beyond a doubt that there have been kills missing these past two days. something to keep in mind.

[Korts]

Mmm. Yosarian's reach on des might have been a distancing attempt, especially since he kept reiterating that he wasn't attacking des for the points he raised, merely questioning him. On the other hand, I seem to remember having read an accusation of Yos defending DGB (forb I think it was). Anyway, I'll read Yos' posts in isolation and see if I can find something.

[roflcopter]

i think the most likely yosarian scumpartner is korts

unvote, vote: korts

[populartajo]

Thats why yos was feeling a bit weak when reasoning against vollkan and des.
I dont know, rolf. Yos messed twice with Korts' name. I mean, if they were scumpartners he would think twice before confusing him with Kison, right?

[roflcopter]

Thats why yos was feeling a bit weak when reasoning against vollkan and des.
I dont know, rolf. Yos messed twice with Korts' name. I mean, if they were scumpartners he would think twice before confusing him with Kison, right?

i think its more likely that the name switch was a legitimate mental lapse on yos' part which had nothing to do with his or korts' alignments, but that was certainly a noteworthy attempt to dissuade me from my conclusion for shitty reasons.

[Korts]

People I won't vote for right now:

3. DrippingGoofball
13. Battle Mage
10. Elmo

Noted for possible connections: DGB and Elmo. Yos' reasoning:

The first two seem to be really trying hard to do scumhunting, and I like that. Elmo hasn't done that much yet, but I totally expect him to nail the scum godfather given another 48 hours or so, so I'll give him some breathing room.

The first two he justifies pretty well; and then there's Elmo. I realize this comment regarding Elmo was probably a joke, but it still seems strange that he's unwilling to vote Elmo for this.

The initial questioning of des re: unvoting CKD seems sincere.

Also, I find it odd that Korts, Volkan, and Destuctor are all all attacking for my vote on CKD and yet not one has shown the slightest bit of curiosity for why I am voting him.

Yos.. what

precisely

is the intent behind this post?

It didn't seem odd to you, that they were just flatly declaring my vote on CKD to be "gut", rather then, like, bothering to ask me for the reasons behind my actions?

I would say the intent behind my post was to try and start to flush out possible CKD scumbuddies.

The "it didn't seem odd to you that they..." sentence seems to be asking for support in pressuring the Kison-des-vollkan trio. More implication of an Elmo connection, perhaps, I'm not sure; although the daytalk would serve a better purpose for this kind of request for support, this post still smells a bit fishy.

Note: I'm up to post 15 (in isolation, of Yos' posts). Will continue tomorrow, gotta go.

[Korts]

What's your reasoning exactly, rofl?

[roflcopter]

yos was way too concerned about why people were wagoning you day one and made it his business to make sure your wagon didn't outcompete ckd's. then the continued expressions of exasperation over the fact that not many people did address his concerns about your wagon. thats the biggest thing.