Mini 727 - Mafia in Standardville - Game Over

[Artem]

Hey all.

Vote: Artifex

for copying the first three letters of my name and for pouncing on an easy target.

[Artem]

Hey all.

Vote: Artifex

for copying the first three letters of my name and for pouncing on an easy target.

An

easy target

?

A player who puts somebody at three votes when everybody else has at most one is an easy target.

[Artem]

Fos Artem. I think you could actually be scum. Bringing a RVS wagon to three votes is scummy? That's some imagination. I'd vote for you but Panzer has already been caught.

If you're going to claim a correlation between putting players at L-4 in the random voting stage and chance of being scum, I'll need to hear some justification.

I'm not the one voting for Xdaamno. What makes you think I'm calling 3 votes/L-4 scummy?

[Artem]

You said that putting someone at three votes makes them an easy target. You then voted for the person (Artifax) that put someone at three votes. You were implying there was something scummy about what Artifax did (by accusing her of voting for an easy target, something scum would do but not town) and then voted her using that justification. I'd have passed it off as nothing, but you clarified, implying that your vote was not a joke. Putting someone at three votes is not scummy. Doing what you did was.

Again, I don't think that putting somebody at three votes is scummy, but it does make an easy target (as much as it can be within the first few posts) for scum to pounce on.

My vote was semi-serious in the sense that it had some reason behind it above just a simple joke. Me clarifying the vote reason does not make it any more serious. Clarification followed from all the confusion (where everybody thought that I found 3-vote bandwagon to be scummy).

All that said, I don't actually find Artifex scummy.

Unvote

I agree that's a pretty obvious ploy when Panzerjager flat out spelled it out like that, but did you actually have to go and do it? Let me put it to you another way: what do you hope to gain by your vote?

Somebody (Panzer to be precise) thinks that L-2 is a little scummy, so what does charter do? Disagrees and puts BSG at L-2. Does that make him (charter) scummy? Only if you don't like the wine in front of you.

Why would town want to balance on the fine edge of WIFOM?

FoS: charter

[Artem]

Unvote Vote Artem

From the looks of it, your RVS vote was the only with a serious side attached to it. The only other player who could have a serious reason attached to it, would have been Xdaamno, but I'm not sure about that yet. So I don't see why you would unvote and not vote another player.
You also accused Artifex for going after an easy target as she voted Xdaamno, who had put me at L-4. However, you FoSed the player who put me at L-2. Aren't you doing the same as of which you accused Artifex?
And I don't see the WIFOM. I can see two reasons why Charter put me at L-2. But I'll let Charter respond to this first.

Just like Dfan, I'm wondering why you didn't vote.

You answered the bolded part yourself.

Because if I voted, I would be doing exactly what I voted Artifex for, making me a hypocrite.

charter deserves a FoS, because of the WIFOM. There is, however, a reason for a townie to do what he did. So, yes, let's have charter respond to it first.

arte, why fos, why not vote?

See above

I'm not a huge fan of the Artem L-2 vote from charter, but I do find it interesting that Artem didn't vote. There's no reason not to vote. I think Artem is being careful not to draw the same attention he received from his first vote.
Vote:Artem

See above. (Also, if there is no reason not vote, then why aren't you voting charter yourself?)

[Artem]

And I don't see the WIFOM.

Isnt the WIFOM in question that Panzer said it was scummy to put someone at L-2, then Charter immediately did it as a response to what Panzer said...no scum would open themselves up to scrutiny like that. Or would they, knowing we'd all think that? Or *switching wine, switching wine*

That is correct.

[Artem]

Because if I voted, I would be doing exactly what I voted Artifex for, making me a hypocrite.

Am I the only one who doesn't like this? When I read this, it gives me the impression that he wanted to vote Charter, but didn't do so as it would make him a hypocrite. Isn't he admitting here that he finds Charter scummy, while saying that what Charter did isn't scummy just a few posts ago?

So, basically, I'm still a hypocrite?

There's just no pleasing you BSG.

[Artem]

What I

do

find interesting is that you're so concerned with whether I voted or FoSed somebody, while completely disregarding my given reasons. You said that you don't see the WIFOM. It was pointed out to you. Yet you seem adamant about your opinion of charter putting you at L-2.

I can FoS charter. I can also vote for him. It doesn't make much difference right now as there is no bandwagon on him. I'm not pouncing on an easy target. I'm giving him a slap on the wrist, because townies (assuming he is one) shouldn't play with WIFOM as it distracts and confuses the town.

The fact that you're pouncing on me, while disregarding my arguments against charter tells me that you're really not so worried about the bandwagon on yourself. Why would that be? (One scenario may be that charter (or somebody else on your wagon for that matter) is/are (one of) your buddy(-ies), so you know that they may unvote you at any point to prevent a lynch of you.)

[Artem]

I can FoS charter. I can also vote for him. It doesn't make much difference right now as there is no bandwagon on him. I'm not pouncing on an easy target. I'm giving him a slap on the wrist, because townies (assuming he is one) shouldn't play with WIFOM as it distracts and confuses the town.

But, isn't the point of a FoS that you only use it when you already have a vote down? As far as I knew, it served only to show that you think that person is scummy but not as scummy as the person you're voting for. If you have no vote on someone, but you find someone suspicious, vote for them!

Another reason to FoS and not vote is if you feel that FoS is enough.

I feel that, at least until charter explains himself, an FoS is enough.

So do you think it's scummy only because of the WIFOM? Do you think that charter is not an opportunistic scum pouncing on an easy target then?

Both statements are correct.

You're not pouncing an easy target? But you wanted to as post 39 gives that impression. You only FoSed him, because you didn't want to come across as a hypocrite, as said in post 39. If you FoSed Charter for the WIFOM, then why no vote as it wouldn't make you a hypocrite. You're now making up excuses why you aren't voting Charter.

I'm sure that if I voted charter instead of FoSed him, we would having essentially the same conversation, but with me trying to show that my vote is not hypocritical because it's for different reasons. There's just no pleasing the penguin, so I think I'll stand my ground with the FoS.

If town lynch a player with many random votes, then there's something strange going on with the wagon. If I'm lynched with most of these votes, it will only give information.

Agreed.

And it's interesting that you name Charter as my buddy, while all the other players are put into the category of buddy. Are you implying something?

My imagination runs wild sometimes.

I like artifex or artem more as scum more than BSG right now. Lynx looks town.

Care to explain?

[Artem]

Also, why does it feel like there's only five of us playing?

[Artem]

@Artem I believe, why is it bad to go after easy targets? And what classifies an easy target? If I claimed scum would I be an easy target and would you vote me?

From the scum's point of view, an easy target is a townie that is easy to attack because they've done scummier things than others.

From the townie's point of view, it's a little difficult to tell who constitutes an easy target. The best we can do is watch for the reasons player A jumps all over player B. For example, during the random voting stage, Artifex voted for Xdaamno because he put a third vote on BSG. At the time, putting a third vote on somebody was the most unusual (scummiest?) thing, so I called Artifex out for jumping on an easy target.

If you claimed scum, I would FoS you for WIFOM to begin with.

[Artem]

(a) I would argue that I had just as much "banter" with BSG as I did with Artifex. Mafia is not srs bsns to me.

(b) If I voted for my buddy to distance myself from them, why would I unvote them when they were not in any danger, especially since I didn't vote for anybody else?

[Artem]

So voting someone you find scummier then everyone else is scummy and attacking an easy target? Riiiiiiight. Also, if you FoS someone who is claimed scum, you clearly are a poor player. Assuming their are no Jester-esque roles, you lynch the claimed scum, period.

Artem, I wanted you to answer that.

I'm not entirely sure what else you want me to say. I've provided my view of the "easy target" argument in #68. The rest of your post simply comments on my skill level and provides an advice. I've noted it.

Artem, (b) is Wifom?

(b) If I voted for my buddy to distance myself from them, why would I unvote them when they were not in any danger, especially since I didn't vote for anybody else?

Don't like this. Isn't this WIFOM?

Sure, it's WIFOM if you think that I (as scum) would do something pointless, just for the whole sake of later claiming that it was pointless for scum to do that. I would still like to hear from Lowell why he thinks his reason (b) has good motivation for scum.

If you think what I said is WIFOM, then you should also look at this:

What advantage would I gain as scum doing that I wouldn't gain as town? Why did I do it?

@Charter: I still see what you've done as WIFOM. Lynx sums it up the best:

However, the part most of us find scummy is the fact that charter placed the L-2 directly after Panzer stated it was scummy to do so.

Placing somebody at L-2 to look for reactions is scumhunting. Doing what somebody called scummy

right after they did so

is WIFOM.

Why are you assuming I am town on page 2?

The assumption is made for the sake of the argument. If that assumption is not made, the argument makes no sense.

ATM, I find artem the most scummy. You never satisfactorily answered what is wrong with pouncing on easy targets. Sure there are opportunistic scum, but there are also people who, for good reasons, seem scum.

It's hard to distinguish between scum and town when somebody jumps on an easy target, unless, of course, you know the alignment. However, I used it as an argument to vote Artifex

as my first post in the game during the RVS stage.

I would not seriously consider lynching somebody because I thought they went after an easy target.

So 1) you dodge the issue of acknowledging you wanted to vote for charter but didn't because it would come across as scummy 2) You create a scum team of BSG and charter for really bad reasons. 3) BSG, scum? only if you like omgus

Can you break these up and provide the appropriate quotes, please? I'm having a hard time seeing how you've derived all of that from my three paragraphs.

I will also

Vote: Lowell

because he generally fails to provide reasons behind his words/actions (see his first two posts). He references forgetfullness as a way to avoid providing reasons. When others call him out on him, he draws up a buddying/distancing scenario (how do you forget that in the first place? it feels like he drew up the case when others asked him to provide reasons, rather than the case itself being the reasons) and goes back to lurking.

[Artem]

Regarding my vote on Lowell:

Those of you that think I'm voting Lowell for less reasons that I've provided for other players, can you please make the appropriate quotes that show that I've given more reason to vote for other players than I have for Lowell?

...his big post targetting charter, dan, and pretty much every other user then he makes one small paragraph on Lowell and votes him for that

Those big posts were largely defense, not offense. Unless you're referring to other posts, in which case, quote please.

[Artem]

EBWOP: Unless you're referring to

some

other posts, in which case, quote please.

[Artem]

Nope, still referring to that post. It just seems to me that your vote was OMGUS with the way Lowell was calling you (and artifex) a scumbuddy and you try to hide that under reasons super condensed into three lines.

Dont get me wrong, Lowell's lack of decent posting does make him look scummish, but it could also be as simple as him being stupid.

I would still like you to show me one of my posts where I presented more (serious) reasons to vote for somebody else. Comparing my paragraph on Lowell to "all those big posts" is just a blurby reason to vote me without providing any kind of evidence.

[Artem]

But here you're arguing that I haven't provided enough reasons to vote for Lowell, as compared to the other players:

...due to his big post targetting charter, dan, and pretty much every other user then he makes one small paragraph on Lowell and votes him for that. If he was gonna do a big post like that, I would expect some more reasons or at least more explanation as to why he would make a vote as OMGUS as that.

I am, therefore, asking you to show me why that's not enough reasons, via comparison to my other posts.

[Artem]

Also, I'm not asking you to give me reasons to vote for other players. I am asking you to show me where

I

provided more reason to vote for somebody else.

[Artem]

Vanilla townie.

[Artem]

Sure, it's WIFOM if you think that I (as scum) would do something pointless, just for the whole sake of later claiming that it was pointless for scum to do that. I would still like to hear from Lowell why he thinks his reason (b) has good motivation for scum.

It's wifom because it's a distancing maneuver (scummy) yet your argument is it's so pointless that mafia would never do it.

Yet, I am asking Lowell to explain why his argument point has good motivation for scum. WIFOM was not his original point of attack. Buddying/distancing was and I'm asking him to explain why it makes sense for scum to play as I did.

So 1) you dodge the issue of acknowledging you wanted to vote for charter but didn't because it would come across as scummy

Because if I voted, I would be doing exactly what I voted Artifex for, making me a hypocrite.

Am I the only one who doesn't like this? When I read this, it gives me the impression that he wanted to vote Charter, but didn't do so as it would make him a hypocrite. Isn't he admitting here that he finds Charter scummy, while saying that what Charter did isn't scummy just a few posts ago?

So, basically, I'm still a hypocrite?

There's just no pleasing you BSG.

While I "dodged" the point here, I've addressed it in my post that followed. (See my post #8)

I'm sure that if I voted charter instead of FoSed him, we would having essentially the same conversation, but with me trying to show that my vote is not hypocritical because it's for different reasons. There's just no pleasing the penguin, so I think I'll stand my ground with the FoS.

What I

do

find interesting is that you're so concerned with whether I voted or FoSed somebody, while completely disregarding my given reasons. You said that you don't see the WIFOM. It was pointed out to you. Yet you seem adamant about your opinion of charter putting you at L-2.

2) You create a scum team of BSG and charter for really bad reasons.

The fact that you're pouncing on me, while disregarding my arguments against charter tells me that you're really not so worried about the bandwagon on yourself. Why would that be? (One scenario may be that charter (or somebody else on your wagon for that matter) is/are (one of) your buddy(-ies), so you know that they may unvote you at any point to prevent a lynch of you.)

3) BSG, scum? only if you like omgus

same quote as above.

This I've also addressed in my post #8:

And it's interesting that you name Charter as my buddy, while all the other players are put into the category of buddy. Are you implying something?

My imagination runs wild sometimes.

Notice how I didn't FoS/vote any players that I conjured up a scenario about. It was purely hypothetical situation that I didn't pursue seriously in the slightest.

You're basing your arguments against me on my post #7, while the points have already been addressed in my post #8. Why?

[Artem]

Oh, and one more thing I forgot to point out.

Still, for now I will Vote: Artem due to his big post targetting charter, dan, and pretty much every other user then he makes one small paragraph on Lowell and votes him for that. If he was gonna do a big post like that, I would expect some more reasons or at least more explanation as to why he would make

a vote as OMGUS as that

.

When most of the town has me on top of their lists, I think that OMGUS argument is a little irrelevant, since it could be used regardless of who I vote for. Must really be grasping at straws for reasons there.

Let's face it. I'm the scummiest player because I am the most active/vocal. The sad truth of a forum-based mafia game is that the player that provides the most content will always be picked apart the most. The down side is that it the "active=scummy" phenomenon only encourages lurking scum.

In reality, hardly anybody of the players voting me can really clearly state good reasons for doing so. There are some that are voting me because my playstyle disagrees with theirs (Yes, I thought charter deserved a slap on the wrist, not a vote. Sure, part of it was also not wanting to look scummy, but that makes me a cautious townie, not scum). Then there are some that are voting me because I'm on top of their list, even though they've never actually clearly stated the reasons behind their votes (panzer, charter come to mind).

Then, towards the end we started getting all sorts of BS reasons. We got Xdaamno who simply agrees that I'm a good lynch without making any original contribution. We got Danchaofan who is using old content that I've already addressed as reasons. We got Master Ruck who doesn't like my reasons against Lowell and hops on for a ride as well. And finally, we have Lowell, who has a small case of amnesia and then suddenly remembers his buddying/distancing case.

So, what I would like everybody who is voting me to do is clearly and concisely state their reasons for doing so. "Because you're on top of my scumlist" or "Because you're the best lynch for today" do not count. Please also state which points, if any, against me I haven't addressed yet.

There's a fare to be on my funwagon and scum don't get to ride for free.

[Artem]

This argument against Lynx seems overly convoluted.

[Artem]

Also, I have stated reason, several times. You never addressed them.

The last time you stated them was in post 81, which I addressed in 112.

You other reasons are:
-I'm not voting Charter (already addressed)
-Charter is my scumbuddy who's trying to pull attention away from me (which is nonsense as charter is just as much interested in me as you are)
-I'm voting Lowell for baseless reasons;

I don't think my reasons for voting are all that baseless. You don't find the little case of amnesia strange?

[Artem]

I absolutely disagree; pressure votes are useful at any stage - and of course pressure votes are useless after being pointed out, I left it until a whole few pages had passed until I showed my hand. I agree that basing votes purely off vibes is very impractical.

So, what were you pressuring me to do? Roleclaim?

I love all these stoaways fleeing my bandwagon, now that I've claimed and asked everybody to state their reasons. Their reason for fleeing: "Artem has defended himself sufficiently". Really?

Take panzer, for example:

@Artem, You're not the most active or vocal and most of the game you actually seemed pretty lost. Also, I have stated reason, several times.

You never addressed them.

Artem has defended sufficiently

for now, but I still think Charter and him could be buddies.

My only post between these two was:

The last time you stated them was in post 81, which I addressed in 112.

You other reasons are:
-I'm not voting Charter (already addressed)
-Charter is my scumbuddy who's trying to pull attention away from me (which is nonsense as charter is just as much interested in me as you are)
-I'm voting Lowell for baseless reasons;

I don't think my reasons for voting are all that baseless. You don't find the little case of amnesia strange?

So, what was it in my post that turned panzer 180 around? Because in my mind the conversation went something like this:

Panzer: "Artem never addressed my reasons for voting him."
Artem: "Yes, I have."
Panzer: "Artem has defended himself sufficiently. I shall unvote."

I think it will be very educational later in the game to go back to my wagon and see how many of these free-riders were on it for the sole purpose of role-fishing. Now, that I've claimed, they seem to be moving on to somebody more interesting than a vanilla townie.

And if this is how we're going to play this game, why don't we just mass-claim now?

[Artem]

Oh, and props to BSG for being the only one sticking to her guns. Combined with the other scumhunting she's been doing, I'd chalk her up as town.

[Artem]

Well, I didn't have anything in mind. If we knew what was on Mars, we wouldn't need to send probes there.

Would you like to share with us what your probe found on planet Artem? After all, you need to justify the future funding of the project "probe".

[Artem]

artem has looked scummy throughout. The case on me in 112 is lazy and made just as pressure on him to do something is mounting. When called on that he spends a lot of time (137, 148) explaining himself. 148 in particular really looks like a case made in hindsight. He slapped a vote down when he was in trouble, then went back after the fact to justify it. His claim of vanilla town does nothing to make me think he shouldn't be the lynch.

1) Can you point out the pressure on me to do something. As far as I recall, nobody was stating that I wasn't doing enough scum-hunting.
2) Post 112:

I will also Vote: Lowell because he generally fails to provide reasons behind his words/actions (see his first two posts). He references forgetfullness as a way to avoid providing reasons. When others call him out on him, he draws up a buddying/distancing scenario (how do you forget that in the first place? it feels like he drew up the case when others asked him to provide reasons, rather than the case itself being the reasons) and goes back to lurking.

Post 148:

And finally, we have Lowell, who has a small case of amnesia and then suddenly remembers his buddying/distancing case.

Can you show what I made up in post 148 in hindsight, that I didn't have in post 112?

(Note that the rest of 148 has nothing to do with my vote on you)

3) I might as well address this here as well:

Sure, it's WIFOM if you think that I (as scum) would do something pointless, just for the whole sake of later claiming that it was pointless for scum to do that. I would still like to hear from Lowell why he thinks his reason (b) has good motivation for scum.

It's wifom because it's a distancing maneuver (scummy) yet your argument is it's so pointless that mafia would never do it.

Yet, I am asking Lowell to explain why his argument point has good motivation for scum. WIFOM was not his original point of attack. Buddying/distancing was and I'm asking him to explain why it makes sense for scum to play as I did.

His original attack is not wifom, it's your response that is wifom. His point is still valid, your response (because of wifom) is invalid.

Lowell's original point is not valid, because it lacks scum motivation. If I say that you're voting xdaamno because he's your partner and you're bussing him, I need to state why it would make sense for scum to do that. Otherwise, my attack lacks the reason to back it up. Sure, if you dismiss my (hypothetical) attack as "scum has no reason to bus their partner here", I could call you out for WIFOM but really, it's my fault for not stating why it would make sense to bus.

For reference, here's Lowell's reason (b) for voting me:

(b) the odd vote/unvote by artem on artifex. It's like he voted for artifex to set up a lecture about the nature of votes, then unvoted, only to FOS someone he said he was actually suspicious of. It looks like he was throwing a token "distancing" vote to a scumbuddy early, then just flimsily moving somewhere else. There's so much buddying here that I think at least one of them is scum.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regarding Xdaamno:

I think that if Xdaamno was scum (and, thus, knew my alignment), he would not have placed the flimsy hammer, because (knowing my alignment) he would have realized that once I card-flipped he would take just as much heat (if not more) on day 2.

I realize that my argument has a hint of WIFOM in it, which is why I'm not going to ask this argument to be taken as serious defense. I am simply explaining how I feel about Xdaamno at the moment and why I'm not voting for him (@charter's question in 228).

I still think that there's a group of scum hopping from one convenient bandwagon to another in hopes of learning more about town roles (another reason why I feel Xdaamno is town). Just waiting for the claim demands now.

[Artem]

EBWOP: I should also state that not

all

the players on Xdaamno's wagon are scum hopping wagons. There are some very good points presented against Xdaamno. But I still get a feeling that we have free riders.

[Artem]

The original attack on Artem was obvious BS, but I'm surprised Artem needed me to point that out for him.

After a re-read,

it's a good lynch right now.

Also, I thought I had already made it clear

I did not want an Artem lynch

. My vote was (primarily) a pressure vote.

[Artem]

So, it was a good lynch but you didn't want it? How does that work?

[Artem]

The original attack on Artem was obvious BS, but I'm surprised Artem needed me to point that out for him.

After a re-read,

it's a good lynch right now.

Also, I thought I had already made it clear

I did not want an Artem lynch

. My vote was (primarily) a pressure vote.

So, it was a good lynch but you didn't want it? How does that work?

"Good lynch" was ambigious, apologies for that. I did not mean I 'wanted an Artem lynch', but rather 'I would lynch Artem if I had to pick someone'.

But who was making you pick anybody? You said I was a good lynch "right now", implying that you were ready to lynch me right that second.

...and if it was a pressure vote, seeing that you're at L-1, I would like you to address the following:

Well, I didn't have anything in mind. If we knew what was on Mars, we wouldn't need to send probes there.

Would you like to share with us what your probe found on planet Artem? After all, you need to justify the future funding of the project "probe".

I lost interest. I'll go look back at the reactions sometime.

[Artem]

Also, if it was all for pressure, why did you not correctly unvote and re-vote me to maintain the said pressure after charter unvoted?

[Artem]

@Xdaamno:

Also, if it was all for pressure, why did you not correctly unvote and re-vote me to maintain the said pressure after charter unvoted?

[Artem]

CBA. I place my own happiness above winning. I believe several people have 'forgotten' similar promises.

Yes, I noted that, but you're sitting at L-1, so we may never hear your analysis.

In case it's not clear, I'm calling bull on the "it was just a pressure vote" argument.

You haven't given motivation, you haven't explained the sudden release of pressure, and you haven't analyzed the results (like you promised you would).

[Artem]

Would anyone else run up Panzer before deadline with me? I believe he has a way higher chance of being scum.

Yes, I would actually.

Unvote; Vote: Panzer

Here's his latest explanation for why he suddenly lost interest in me:

@Artem, My biggest reason for voting was because you and charter seemed like buddies. You had previously defended yourself on a lot of my points when you addressed Danchao's post, so I looked at charter's actions and thought, I best just put these in storage and move on.

However, between post 174, where Panzer was far from letting me go:

Also, I have stated reason, several times. You never addressed them.

and post 185, where all of a sudden, I defended myself sufficiently:

EBWOP:Artem has defended sufficiently for now, but I still think Charter and him could be buddies.

...charter made no posts, and my only post can be summed up as "Yes, I have addressed those points." The only post about me between 174 and 185 that is of interest is 179 by Dan. Dan basically states that he is less suspicious of me now. Panzer simply echos the sentiment in 185. This is suspicious because it feel like Panzer is/was piggy-backing Dan in his attack against me.

Another interesting point is that ever since I called out role-fishers, nobody (particularly neither Panzer nor Charter) has asked Xd to claim. (Except Master Ruck, who simply did so before he read my post). So, this could mean one of two things. Either Panzer/Charter are cautiously avoiding an action that I preemptively called out (which begs the question why), or they already know Xd's role (which makes Xd a scumbuddy). Obviously, Panzer and Charter may have different reasons for why they are not pushing for a claim, but I'm happy with pursuing Panzer right now.

As a side note, Panzer has been lurking lately, likely waiting for the Xd thing to blow over.

[Artem]

Artem, if the only reason your voting for me is because I've been lurking you are sadly mistaken. I've been V/LA. I was visiting my girlfriend all weekend. Well, weekend plus a couple of days, Friday until Tuesday. I only posted Monday night to pickup prods I knew were coming.

Panzer, if you think that lurking is the only reason I'm voting, I'd suggest you read my last post. Lurking is nothing but a one sentence blurb at the end of that post.

How can you have no opinion on Panzer?

I would also like to remind folks that Panzer casually dismissed my earlier arguments against Lowell. If Panzer flips scum, I think Lowell has a good chance of being a scum-buddy.

[Artem]

I like 352 and 366. I still see connections between artem and xda, particularly the way artem is trying to see panzer as an alternative "wagon" when really it was just pulled out of the blue by one player. The way artem is asking everyone their opnion on panzer is odd... it's deflection.

Do you actually read the thread before you chime in with "I like others' arguments" accusations? It's charter, who's asking for everybody's opinion, not I. Also, if you think that I'm pulling attention away from Xda, then I suggest you read my 304.

-----------------

Xda should still post his pbp analysis... or his Panzer case. Currently, he's doing nothing but using "No U" arguments instead of providing the content he promised.

[Artem]

@Panzer: One thing I want you to address specifically is the claim chase. You were pushy about getting me to claim but you don't even hint on claiming with Xd, even though Xd has repeatedly hit L-1. Why the difference? Do you already know Xd's role or are you avoiding asking for a claim because I preemptively called it? If the latter, why?

@Charter: Same question.

Also,

Happy with a Panzer lynch. An Xdaamo lynch is an acceptable last resort.

This is scummy. You're simply brushing off Panzer's defense without ever addressing anything in it.

FoS: Charter

@Xd:

I will when I feel like it.

You've repeatedly hit L-1 and with the current state of the game, you will be deadline lynched. If you were town, you would be concentrated on getting information into the hands of town while you still can. The fact that you haven't been too concerned with it makes you either a lazy townie or a scum. Good riddance in either case, imo. The argument about your post having to be the last one of the day doesn't hold any water. As somebody already mentioned, all eyes are currently on you and whatever you post about other players will not simply be brushed off when (and if) you cardflip town.

And if you need more motivation to get cranking:

Unvote; Vote: Xdaamno; FoS: Panzer

This

is how you pressure vote.

[Artem]

@Xd:

You've repeatedly hit L-1 and with the current state of the game, you will be deadline lynched. If you were town, you would be concentrated on getting information into the hands of town while you still can. The fact that you haven't been too concerned with it makes you either a lazy townie or a scum. Good riddance in either case, imo. The argument about your post having to be the last one of the day doesn't hold any water. As somebody already mentioned, all eyes are currently on you and whatever you post about other players will not simply be brushed off when (and if) you cardflip town.

And if you need more motivation to get cranking:

Unvote; Vote: Xdaamno; FoS: Panzer

This

is how you pressure vote.

This is not the time for pressure voting, as we are approaching a deadline. This is my last post until Artem unvotes.

I absolutely disagree;

pressure votes are useful at any stage

- and of course pressure votes are useless after being pointed out, I left it until a whole few pages had passed until I showed my hand. I agree that basing votes purely off vibes is very impractical.

Die scum die?

(I disagree on the "useless after pointed out" part by the way)

@Panzer & charter: Thanks for responding. I'm stilling thinking about what you've both said.

@Artifex:

Artem- I think he's genuinely scumhunting here. I do disagree with what seems to be his main issue with Panzer- this rolefishing business. If I'm understanding you correctly, youre are saying you preemptively called out role fishing in order to gauge peoples reactions to it. You find Panzer's reaction scummy cause he pushed hard when you were at L-1 but didnt when Xda hit the same count...right?

Yes, more or less. Both Panzer and charter pushed hard for a claim for me but not Xd.

My problem with this is that I dont get the 'preemptive' part. When you posted that, I thought you were dead on- we were a long ways away from deadline and had yet another player at L-1...if there had been calls for another role claim I'd have been very wary at that point. So, if your main point is inconistency in another's play, I dont see an inconsistency.

You just posted the inconsistency in the quote above. It's an inconsistent treatment of two players who both hit L-1. Yes, the difference is that in Xd's case we had my "we have rolefishers" looming over them. My "prediction" that we will have claim demands served several purposes, one of which was to see if anybody would take a cup of WIFOM. But like I said, I'm still thinking about Panzer & charter's responses to why they didn't ask for a claim. The only difference between the two right now is that Panzer wants Xd to claim, while charter hasn't stated such desires. Not quite sure what to make of it.

[Artem]

I intended to take a chance to convince Artem to unvote. I am trying to play the game optimally up until the point where it starts to not become fun. That is something which I will absolutely never sacrifice.

Also, are you seriously trying to say that because townies can still win if they die, there is no reason to stay alive?

A townie should not place their personal survival above the town's victory condition (which is to eliminate all threats).

In your situation, the optimal play for a townie is to provide all the information you can before you are lynched. The optimal play for a scum is to deny the town any information and to try and get as many players voting for a "competitor's" wagon instead.

Xdaamo is still a good lynch because it gives lots of info

, but I really don't see him flipping scum.

This. I think that we should go ahead with the Xd's lynch. At best, we will lynch a scum (or an SK, or any one of those other 3-rd party roles). At worst we will lose a townie who has not contributed much in terms of scumhunting.

Charter is behaving very strangely. Take this for example:

Xdaamo can theoretically be town, while I can't see Panzer being town at all.

Unless you know everybody's alignment, Panzer can also "theoretically be town", because from a townie's point of view nothing is 100% certain.

If Xd flips scum, I can see Charter as a potential buddy, who is going to ride the waves of WIFOM on day 2 with arguments similar to post 357.

If anything, you should be suspicious of me for clearly trying to get someone else besides Xdaamo lynched right before deadline. You continue to view his actions as scummy, but it doesn't make sense that you're not getting worked up over my recent actions. If you actually think Xdaamo is scum, then you surely must think I am as well because I'm clearly trying to lynch someone besides him today.

So, roles like masons and lovers aside:

In post 400, Lowell attempts to start a bandwagon on me in a fashion, similar to charter's wagon on panzer. If Lowell, charter and Xd were all scum, they would not be splitting the effort between me and panzer. So, that means two thing:
-Lowell and Xd are not likely to be scums together; (Lowell would try to save his buddy by hopping over to Panzer's wagon)
-Lowell and charter are not likely to be scums together; (splitting the effort argument)

Now, panzer...
-Xd and panzer likely have opposite alignment; (duh!)
-Lowell and panzer likely share the same alignment; (they largely ignore each other but there's a handful of posts where they brush off other players' arguments against their "buddy")
-charter and panzer likely have opposite alignment; (all the bickering, unless of course they are distancing and charter is bussing panzer)

afatchic requesting an extension is interesting, but I would love to see him post some content before I draw any conclusions.

[Artem]

-Xd and panzer likely have opposite alignment; (duh!)

Oh, can you explain? What makes it unlikely we're both town?

I think that if you were both town, we would have seen a lynch a long time ago, because scum would likely pile in on one of you. Of course, we don't know how many scum there are, so it's hard to know how likely they are to influence one wagon over another, but I also have my own wagon to compare yours to. (I would argue that I rose to enough votes to get lynched faster than you and for less scumminess.)

I'm also a little biased at this point, because I really think you are one of the scums. I also think that your cardflip will be very educational.

[Artem]

You think I'm scum, yet my reveal will be educational?

Uh-huh. I think your cardflip is going to tell us a lot about other players.

[Artem]

Town players are very rarely certain in practice...

I have an example of an overly-certain townie, that got himself lynched because of his 100%-sure statements. (Unfortunately, it's a game in-progress, so I can't reference it yet.)

The very first game I played on MS, I was quite certain about certain players' alignment also. (http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8164) If you read day 2, you will see that it also got me in trouble.

Based on this rather limited experience, I'd say that 100%-suredness is treated as a scumtell more often than it should be.

Can you provide an example where a scum showed that attitude? (More out of personal curiosity than anything.)

I'm not sure that I will be lynched today, so I won't self-hammer.

[Artem]

Uhh, why so urgent Lowell? Deadline is 3 hours away so even if no one hammers him, he'll still be lynched unless everyone decides to simultaneously jump off his wagon. On that matter, Xda, is there a reason besides your own survival that you want another extension?

There's a confusion about timezones, methinks. The boards are on EST, while the deadline is on PST. Hence the 8 minutes reference in Lowell's post, which was made at 10:53am EST.

[Artem]

Ditto. As far I know I'm not 100% confirmed.

Xdaamo, you're trying to say that we are scumbuddies together. For numerous reasons this isn't true (for example, I'm not scum)

Oh, and this is the scummiest sentence said in my entire mafia career:

Assuming Xdaamo isn't scum, like I said, I'd bet money Artem is town.

It will be obvious why I said that tomorrow.

Not obvious to me.

[Artem]

So, roles like masons and lovers aside:

In post 400, Lowell attempts to start a bandwagon on me in a fashion, similar to charter's wagon on panzer. If Lowell, charter and Xd were all scum, they would not be splitting the effort between me and panzer. So, that means two thing:
-Lowell and Xd are not likely to be scums together; (Lowell would try to save his buddy by hopping over to Panzer's wagon)
-Lowell and charter are not likely to be scums together; (splitting the effort argument)

Now, panzer...
-Xd and panzer likely have opposite alignment; (duh!)
-Lowell and panzer likely share the same alignment; (they largely ignore each other but there's a handful of posts where they brush off other players' arguments against their "buddy")
-charter and panzer likely have opposite alignment; (all the bickering, unless of course they are distancing and charter is bussing panzer)

afatchic requesting an extension is interesting, but I would love to see him post some content before I draw any conclusions.

So, given the fact that Xd flipped town, charter claimed hider and based on the arguments above, I'm inclined to think:
-Charter is likely town;
-Lowell is likely scum;
-Panzer is likely scum;

I don't have a good read on Dan at the moment, and I'm much more inclined to think that Lowell is scum, given my previous arguments against him, and the general lurking/lack of contribution.

Vote: Lowell

(@Charter: minor point but I am a male. Artifex is female.)

[Artem]

The logic is probabilistic, hence the word "likely" interspersed everywhere. I'm writing down the things I see in the game and derive conclusions that seem likely to me.

I claimed now because everyone was asking me to explain my breadcrumbs from the end of yesterday. Plus, as long as I hid behind townies (and they aren't killed) I can't be killed at night, so me and the scum get to play outguess. The reason why I'm not waiting is I fully plan on continuing using my ability so there's a good chance I die sooner, rather than later.

The problem is that you're effectively telling scum who they should kill next by naming a confirmed townie each day. That also means that I am not likely to see Day 3.

On a side note, what happens when the hider hides behind the paranoid gun owner? Dead hider, I presume? (

Question for the mod

)

[Artem]

Artem I don't know if you wouldn't make it to day 3. If your claim is correct and you're just a vanilla townie then I see no reason for scum to go after you. If Charter's claim is also true I see no reason that the scum wouldn't go after another townie because they could hit a powerole plus Charter if they guess correctly. So Charter can basically clear townies and still remain invulnerable to night kill.

No entirely correct, because scum will want to minimize the number of confirmed townies that reach the end game.

[Artem]

@lynx- I pushed for an artem wagon because I thought it was better than the Xda wagon, based on their interactions. I backed off at the end when charter came out with his "bet my life artem is town" bit. I assumed this meant he had some information he didn't want to reveal at the time.

Can you be a little more specific? One of my biggest things against you is that you've been using blanket statements / generalizations. For example, what does "based on their interactions" mean? What was scummy about my interactions with Xda? Is it still scummy now that he's cardflipped? Why or why not?

[Artem]

Don't forget Artem's case on Lowell which we're still waiting Lowell to repond to.

I actually think that Lowell is more likely to be scum than Panzer. (or Lynx for that matter).

[Artem]

I can see a case being made for Master Ruck or Tubby.

Then do it.

While I'm trying to get Lowell to answer my accusations, I'm certainly keeping my eyes open for the other cases and the reactions to them.

[Artem]

prod recieved. I've been neglecting this game.

Translation: I've been lurking.

[Artem]

I did forget about this one. I'll review Lowell later.

Charter, can you please follow up on this?

[Artem]

Eh, I reread Lowell. He's a lurker for sure but I don't see much of a case on him right now.

So you have no problems FoSing and voting panzer for lurking, but not Lowell?

[Artem]

@Lowell:

Here's the sequence of posts that I have a problem with from Day 1:

I like artifex or artem more as scum more than BSG right now. Lynx looks town.

(Artem, Artifex, MR and Panzer all ask for reasons in the next few posts.)

(Server move.)

@panzer, I dont' really remember why I said that right now. My brain stopped working when the site crashed, TBH.

No doubt there's a great reason, though. I'll figure it out.

Also, Lowell, I believe it's a cop out to say you forgot everything since the site crashed. You could easily reread the pages and recall your earlier thoughts. I think you just don't want to back up your vague statements with some actually evidence.

Lowell- A vote for me without explanation, then a post with some opinions on four player's scum factor without explanation. I actually like the having opinions part, because as I've reread the game I've noticed we have some players who are hesitant to do that. But it doesnt help to know what you think if there's no explanation why. I'll buy needing time to reread for now, but I'd still like you to offer those four lines of reasoning when you come back.

I await Lowell's memory

(Finally....)

Okay here's how the first 2 pages look to me.

9-11- the banter between artem and artifex makes me uneasy
30- charter's post is strange, he chides panzer, then votes with him
33- artem gives a speech about "how many votes is scummy" then unvotes artifex [what was the point?], then only FOSs charter [??]
35- BSG hits it RIGHT ON THE NOSE
38-40- more uncomfortable banter from artem and artifex

What I don't like is (a) the banter between artem and artifex, which seems to keep happening, and (b) the odd vote/unvote by artem on artifex. It's like he voted for artifex to set up a lecture about the nature of votes, then unvoted, only to FOS someone he said he was actually suspicious of. It looks like he was throwing a token "distancing" vote to a scumbuddy early, then just flimsily moving somewhere else. There's so much buddying here that I think at least one of them is scum.

Generally, I just think they're lazy as well. BSG was the random choice for a few votes at the beginning. Then, somehow, it became something one had to explain when they weren't voting for BSG. I think they're happy letting the initial pressure dictate what happens, which itself is very scummy.

BSG has handled the pressure well, I think. Post 35 is exactly on the money and he seems to be payign attention genearlly. Lynx I just think is town because he's active and not trying to kiss ass.

One more. Despite charter's strange post 30, I think he's town as well. I like the fact that he's willing to take BSG up to L-2 just to see what happens. That strikes me as gutsy, and townish.

Basically, post 77 looks made up because other players have consistently applied pressure. If #77 was actually the reasons for post 52 in the first place, then how can you forget such reasons? Read #66: "No doubt there's a great reason, though. I'll figure it out."?? That basically translates to: "Let me re-read and make up the reasons".

Then my other post, which Lowell never addressed:

@lynx- I pushed for an artem wagon because I thought it was better than the Xda wagon, based on their interactions. I backed off at the end when charter came out with his "bet my life artem is town" bit. I assumed this meant he had some information he didn't want to reveal at the time.

Can you be a little more specific? One of my biggest things against you is that you've been using blanket statements / generalizations. For example, what does "based on their interactions" mean? What was scummy about my interactions with Xda? Is it still scummy now that he's cardflipped? Why or why not?

Another strange thing is that Lowell says charter is town in 77 and charter is reluctant to go after Lowell. While I believe charter's claim, these two facts make me wary.

If you filter the posts by Lowell, you'll see that he gave virtually no contribution. He consistently lurks and makes blanket statements. I want him lynched.

[Artem]

Yes, I'm actually reading lynx as town and I don't understand the wagon on him. Most of the arguments against him either have to do with him sitting on the fence, or they are too convoluted for me to want to follow them.

The fence-sitting comes off as an undecided townie rather than an opportunistic scum. At least to me.

[Artem]

Also, what do you think are the chances of scum having some talking on Night 0 and deciding to claim obscure (yet, investigation-immunity guaranteeing) roles throughout the game?

Also, I just reread my role PM,

ALL

night actions targetting me fail if I hide behind a townie.

I admit, it's some wild speculation, but I have to throw it out on the table, since I am not likely to see the next day.

[Artem]

Speaking of these investigation immune claims Artem is talking about. It doesn't make much sense for charter. His ability clears townies. He's actively hurting the scum team every time he successfully hides behind a new person and confirms their innocence.
It's confusing, because Artem as town should know that charter as scum would be hurting his team by confirming Artem.

Unless, charter simply kills who he confirms the following night. The down side is, yes, there will be one (and exactly one if played correctly) confirmed townie each day. But look on the up side, with every confirmed townie charter-scum would be instilling even more confidence into his claim, thereby having an easy, soft ride to the end-game.

(This is all hypothetical talk, since I happen to believe his claim, at least for now.)

@ Artem- back in 497, you said you thought charter was likely town. Has your opinion of that changed any? Because I'm reading doubt in several of your posts later:

His dismissal of Lowell makes me wary. To date, three people have dismissed Lowell as a lurker but not a threat (Panzer on Day 1, charter and Lynx on Day 2). charter and Lynx had no problems using lurking a scummy point against other players, however. (charter against Panzer and Lynx against Darox)

I don't like the double standards. I also don't like that Lowell is basically given a free ride card. He lurks, provides no content, and appears disinterested in the game (could easily be a fake dis-interest). If he's scum, he's having it really well right now.

As a side note, Panzer told Lowell to "post or be lynched" in post 94, which makes it unlikely that they are scum together and actually buys Panzer some townie points.

[Artem]

Artem, I said panzer lurking isn't helping him, that's not why I'm suspicious of him. I'm suspicious of him for his crackpot theories day one that don't make sense, and how he has now flipped on them completely (and how he flipped a bunch yesterday).

Sure, your current vote on him doesn't hinge on lurking, but here's you using lurking as a scummy point during Day 1:

As a side note, Panzer has been lurking lately, likely waiting for the Xd thing to blow over.

Welcome to the thing I find most suspicious about him now. Ever since his vote on Xdaamo, he's said nothing about Xdaamo. He's just sitting tight on the wagon. Now it's almost deadline and he's still lurking (though he did say he was away) but it doesn't excuse him clinging to his Artem+charter scumbuddies but voting Xdaamo terrible logic. He gets called out on it and all of a sudden just drops it.

[Artem]

If there is something to the lynx case, however, I think artem is doing a great job of derailment.

You're not paying close attention to the game, but enough to know about the Lynx case? Townies have more motivation to pay very close attention to the game because they are trying to find scum. The way you're playing is paying enough attention to know who's getting bandwagoned, but not enough to do any scumhunting yourself.

Also, I'm doing a good job derailing?? Because other players are so keen on leaving Lynx wagon and going after you?? What makes you think we can't look at both you and Lynx at the same time?

[Artem]

Confirm vote: Lowell

He's done very little to address my points in posts 571 and 602.

[Artem]

@artem- what makes me think it might be derailment is the fact that you're attack on me seems convenient and contrived. You're being vocal about it in order to not have to take a stance on lynx.

I already voiced my stance on lynx:

Yes, I'm actually reading lynx as town and I don't understand the wagon on him. Most of the arguments against him either have to do with him sitting on the fence, or they are too convoluted for me to want to follow them.

The fence-sitting comes off as an undecided townie rather than an opportunistic scum. At least to me.

You're using a lie to try and come up with a scummy point against me instead of answering my arguments against you. Happy with my vote.

[Artem]

I also like Lowell posts just enough to avoid a prod, without really providing us with anything.

[Artem]

I don't understand you two (charter and panzer). You're bouncing your votes back and forth, while letting Lowell get away with his playstyle. Are you buddies with Lowell and just putting on a show for distancing reasons, while at the same time using Lynx as a townie scapegoat?

[Artem]

My thoughts on Panzer:

My initial problem with Panzer was that he went from having massive amounts of suspicion on me to saying that I've defended myself sufficiently. However, I feel that he addressed the point pretty well during Day 1. Since then, the arguments against him were not that great. Many accuse him of opportunistic vote-hopping, yet the accusers themselves are just as guilty of that, and without knowing players' alignments with certainty, I'm having second thoughts about everybody.

I don't like this post:

I've played with Lowell before and he is a chronic lurker. Other then a couple of mildly scummy post, he's not so bad. He's nowhere near as scummy as lynx. Lynx gets my vote, because voting myself would be stupid. Only other person that is mildly scummy is Ruck, who I'm contemplating making a case for. Have to re-read him and decide if he is worse then ruck.

..because it effectively says that we should encourage lurking by ignoring it. How is that a pro-town attitude? If somebody lurks, you keep applying more and more pressure on them until they start to provide content and you get a better read on them. Several people said that they have a null-tell on Lowell, yet it's so easy to fix that. Just pile up pressure votes until Lowell starts dropping either scum-tells or town-tells, either of which is better than the null-tell. Players that are hesitant to use their vote to get better hints of somebody's alignment are either poor players or scum unwilling to bring their buddy Lowell to a spotlight.

I also don't like this:

After Panzer flips scum, MR has stocked up on town points, it's not too late to get yours too!

ok i heard enough

untvote: vote: panzer

I agree. unvote, vote panzer. This is a better option than lynx.

I'm sticking with my vote.

[Artem]

^^ This right here is why I feel Lynx is town ^^

I've seen this kind of reasoning throughout Lynx's play and I'm reading this as an undecided townie, not an opportunistic scum.

I'm doubting Panzer's claim, obviously. However, I'm also wondering what's going to happen if Panzer flips town. I'm not 100% satisfied with the wagon on him and I'm also reluctant to let Lowell get away with lurking. (Dan's been lurking lately too, I've noticed.)

I'm debating on ending this day now or waiting until Sunday when Panzer can answer the questions directed at him. We

could

use the time until Sunday to force Lowell to drop some tells.... Just saying.

[Artem]

Lowell could be scum, but his lurking simply doesn't give us as much to work with as panzer has.

But that's the point! You won't get more content until you apply pressure. Saying "I wish Lowell contributed more" is not going to get us anywhere. Use your vote.

[Artem]

@Lowell: So basically, everybody who's voting you or wants to vote you is scummy and you don't have opinions about anybody else in the game. Yea, happy with my vote.

Post 694 by master ruck is very very bad. This looks like textbook, almost-too-obvious derailment. Panzer is within a vote of being lynched. MR voted panzer just after the expansion of the case by charter in 634. When the wagon gained steam, he jumped onto the most obvious wagon (Lowell). Nothing really happend between 634 and 695 that should have made a difference, but he knows that he's insulated by the fact that (a) I dont' defend myself that often, and (b) artem's narrowminded pursuit of me.

My posts happened between 634 and 695.

[Artem]

Wait, no I think there's something to it. If charter hides behind Panzer:

a) If Panzer is town, mafia targets him. We lose two townies.
b) If Panzer is scum, mafia targets somebody else. We lose two townies (one nightkill and charter as a result of him hiding behind mafia). However, because Panzer is alive, we KNOW that Panzer is scum.
c) If Panzer is town and mafia DOESN'T target him then charter lives and we have a confirmed townie.

In all three cases, we learn Panzer's alignment. In two of these cases, we lose two townies. So, we can think of it as trading charter for knowing somebody's alignment, a one-shot investigation.

That said, I don't think we should waste charter's power on Panzer. Even though I'm more confident that Lowell is scum over Panzer, a Panzer lynch makes sense and I'm willing to switch my vote to Panzer (of course, now that I said that Lowell has even less reason to post). The question is, do we use our one-shot investigation tonight or just let charter hide secretly?

[Artem]

Thinking of it, Lowell might be a good candidate to one-shot investigate since many players expressed the fact that he's a null-tell. In the worst case, we will lose charter and a lazy townie that doesn't contribute anything anyway. Still thinking about the best strategy, though.

[Artem]

Here are some more thoughts. Panzer is a good candidate for a lynch today, so say we go through with it. If Panzer flips scum, I say charter does a mystery hide. If Panzer flips town, I would say that suspicion against charter will rise quite a bit, since we don't know if he fake-claimed hider. To avoid the town having to consider the possibility of charter being scum during D3, I think the most pro-town thing for him to do would be to one-shot investigate somebody. That way we get both an alignment check on charter's target and charter himself.

So, what do you guys think? We pick player X as the "investigation" target, then lynch Panzer. If Panzer flips scum, charter does a mystery hide. If Panzer flips town, charter hides behind player X.

Lowell has my vote for being player X. Or Dan, really. Both have been suspicious lurkmonsters.

[Artem]

...and yes, in the worst case, we would be down 3 townies, but we will have at least one confirmed townie or one confirmed scum. (Man, I hope Panzer really is scum.)

[Artem]

Also, please keep Panzer at L-2 until we decide on a strategy. No sense in allowing him to self-hammer and cut discussion.

[Artem]

charter, keep in mind that Panzer's cardflip will lock the thread, so if we're going with my plan, be sure to tell us who you will pick as the "if Panzer flips town" target.

Here's the deal sealer for Panzer for me:

Dude, he is in the third spot. He's jumping on me while the wagon is hot and picking an easy target. His jump was incredibly scummy and

if I'm scum

I would hope you would look at that as him bussing me.

The words "If I'm scum" should never leave a townie's mouth.

Unvote; Vote Panzer

[Artem]

My partners are Lowell and Artifex.

Hmm... lemme dig up the theory thread about scum naming their partners.

[Artem]

Good job, Charter.

Thanks for modding, Llama.

Nice playing with you all. Very enjoyable game.

Lowell needs to be more pro-town.