Mini 737 - Hack Poetry Mafia (Game Over)

[Spolium]

Yeah, I'm increasingly concerned about the anti-town nature of Spring's posts, particularly in regard to the flippant responses issued when her lurking is called into question.

As I said before I'm not really a big fan of lynching lurkers (especially on D1), but this sort of stubborn lurking is confusing and ultimately damaging for town.

BTW ignore what I asked about common roles in Normal games, I just found the info I needed in the wiki.

[don_johnson]

Having people upset with you is one thing. Being at L-1 is quite another. If she doesn't talk then, she deserves to be lynched or replaced.

FoS: Jebus

, for suggesting putting a lurker at L-1. even on day one, this could be a dangerous move.

What's wrong with it? When is it an acceptable time to put a lurker at L-1?

What's wrong with it?

well, for starters, we have no idea who SL is yet. we may as well have skipped the rvs and bandwagoned the last player to confirm. putting a lurker who is "busy atm" at L-1 is poor play.

we have no idea what roles are out there(no i am not talking jester). so placing someone indiscriminately in danger of being lynched is a gamble. you are gambling that every town player is smart enough not to hammer, and that scum are not that brazen. we have no idea of game balance or special roles, etc. if you are upset with SL then demand a replacement, don't put her in position to be lynched. that said:

When is it an acceptable time to put a lurker at L-1?

like most mafia questions, the answer to this depends on the circumstances. the earliest i could see this happening is day 2, however, days 3 or 4 are much more likely. i find lurking much more suspicious if it seems like a strategic shift in playstyle. meta can play a role, too, but i have already explained how i feel about that. SL knows she will accumulate a vote or two from lurking, sometimes a little pressure does the job, but if a player is bogged down in rl or other games, pressure will only have so much of an effect. the right thing to do on day one is request replacement.

The other problem is that no one else really jumps out at me. If you're gonna push me, I have to say don_johnson's 'fear' of L-1 is a bit much. The argument why that's not necessarily a problem has been made and one has to wonder if he's just trying very hard to do the 'townie thing'.

sorry, but "fear" seems to be a convenient interpretation. also, at the time of your post i had not yet responded to the argumnent as to "why its not necessarily a problem", so i don't really see how you can paint

me

as trying to do the "townie thing". are you saying that

i'm

the most suspicious person in this game to

you

as of this post?

this could be a

dangerous

move.

change the word "dangerous" to "assanine", or "downright stupid". if a dumb townie hammers then you have NOTHING to go on day 2. when a player is at L-1, all someone needs is a halfway legitimate reason to drop the hammer and we are left to decide if they are dumb town or scum. in that way you are putting someone in a position to be lynched without a decipherable bandwagon because the only viable excuse is that a dumb or overzealous townie(or scum) hammered. lynching a lurker day 1 is anti-town. request a replacement if you are dissatisfied with their play.

Don, I don't know why you're worried about L-1. If anybody quick lynched spring, they'd be under strong scrutiny the next day. How do you think Spring should be dealt with if she keeps it up? Replacement?

replacement. absolutely. pressuring and/or threatening to lynch is a waste of time and can only muddy the waters. let me be clear, i am not "worried" or "fearful". i just think placing someone in harm's way for "lurking" on day 1 is not the right action to be taking. people have both in game and out of game reasons to be aloof, so requesting replacements makes the most sense.

[Goatrevolt]

well, for starters, we have no idea who SL is yet. we may as well have skipped the rvs and bandwagoned the last player to confirm. putting a lurker who is "busy atm" at L-1 is poor play.

we have no idea what roles are out there(no i am not talking jester). so placing someone indiscriminately in danger of being lynched is a gamble. you are gambling that every town player is smart enough not to hammer, and that scum are not that brazen. we have no idea of game balance or special roles, etc. if you are upset with SL then demand a replacement, don't put her in position to be lynched.

Fair enough.

On the topic of jesters, it's not really a consideration. A jester is not going to be in a normal game. I highly doubt Jester would even be in a theme game, unless expressly stated beforehand. Fearmongering about jesters just leads to hesitance to lynch scummy players, which is not pro-town.

SL: Epiphany or not, you certainly have some opinions on the game. And what do you expect to gain by "being contrary?"

[Ice9]

Mod, other players, I'm sorry but I've been busier than I thought I would be recently. I don't want to replace out, but I may have to. I'll know by tomorrow. Bear with me.

[Azhrei]

Unvote

I'm behind, and I think my vote may be contributing to a lynch that I don't necessarily agree with.

I'm about 1/2 way through a reread, and again, I'm sorry, I'm busy atm. It's the weekend now, so I should be able to catch up. Once I've done that, then I'll talk some more.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

V/LA later today until Monday.

[Ice9]

OK it will be another day or two before I can read and post, but I'll be back with several days to spare before the deadline so I'm happy to say I don't need to be replaced.

[springlullaby]

Nice, a deadline. I'll call my shots before that.

[RedCoyote]

Nice, a deadline. I'll call my shots before that.

Don't let our questions or concerns get in the way of that.

[RedCoyote]

I disagree with both of these players and

would like Ice to refresh us on exactly why it was he originally voted Wolf.

---

Thank you Goat for clearing up the Jester thing.

As the deadline draws near, I'm still comfortable with a Budja lynch, but I can also be persuaded against Jebus or fhq.

spring, as a policy lynch, I think will suffice. I do think we need to start discussing the lynch more at this point. I plan to give a more complete post in the next day or two about where I stand with everyone.

[springlullaby]

Since you guys asked for contribution, you get what you deserve, the entire content of my scrapbook in all its unintelligible glory. Conclusions in bold.

gads:

3. RV Red
24. something about RC's playstyle, says don johnson quick to show his suspicions - not sure what it means,
50. note 'biggest thing' is budja vote, think Ice's sus a bit of a reach-soft
67. with RC, find goat 'interesting' because pushing budja the hardest, implying goat is town - queer, i'd says RC is pushing the hardest, Goat is pushing the most deviously; says should look at lurkers - scummy or naive, the best way to deal with lurker when it's not endemic is to let them lurk and see
126. signal will post later
131. no qualm with either goat or spolium - ok; seems to suspect Ice over omgus - open ended, do not like
161. saying that he wasn't defending budja
172. repeat position on budja; ok explanation about lurker; press don about the L-1 comment - ok argument

Milky play since the beginning, nothing to make waves certainly. Backseating. Am willing to lynch.

RC:

4. RV Budja
35. wb reply ok; Ice not sure what it means; gads a little affirmation of independance; confirm vote on Budja not so good, ok note on spolium and don.
45. disagree with Ice on wolf; "more concerned with budja - dunno what piggyback mean
55. resays it looked like piggyback ask for clarification on individual suspicion from budja - I don't feel budja looks like scum, this singleminded pressing is kinda sus, have to see how it develops
64. seems to be sticking to the budja vote with an explanation amounting to 'gut', not much of a clarification, more like a repeat - do not like the single mindedness pinging some
72. ok explanation to everything, lenghtily, bore me to tears; good point about ellipses - like :: TR
81. FOS ME - cliche argument also, sitting back and watching is what the cool kids do, when you have nothing to say, keep it shut
98. says like Ice, not spolium; says would lynch budja - TR
116. nice post , agree - slight TR but a little short on conviction
133. admit to being caught in a contradiction - good move but scum RC have enough exp to know not to try covering it up; seems to be very confused - given the confession of not giving this game as much attention as it may deserve, the prod to replace me come off as rather hypocritical
143. would not be opposed to a gad lynch, would prefer budja - boo; well I am playing sort of; omgee blatant misrepresentation and trying to steal all my cool points
150. affirm support case against budja
159. reply , thinks with RC is that the replies are tidy but everything is soft. tp for saying whom he doesn't like though
170. suggest I may be jester - this indicate doesn't really think I'm scumscum
174. does that mean you know I'm not scum?
183. certainly not
184. budja lynch or me policy lynch

Milky play but sold on budja and a couple a relevant townie feeling observations. Low danger in keeping around a little.

don:

5. RV WOLF
18. normal response to spolium's vote
20. ok smiley
25. a response to gads - I don't get this post, what the accusation was in the first place, scumlink don+gads
34. ok answer to spolium
37. VOTE BUDJA for posting twice with little input and criticism of 'budja's tactic to get scum to appear' - can't read
49. express regret at rhyme; further question budja ok - TR overall
62. general pov, UNVOTE - hard to tell why the unvote here but not scummy, more soft play
75. VOTE ME for active lurking
92. ok reply to Ice, UNVOTE ME - "uncomplete meta is a terrible reason to vote someone" - queer, why didn't you think that before voting me? - milding vibe
95. reply to Ice, says he is rereading basically - neutral
99. "no. escpecially considering he came out of the gates guns blazing and then shut down the attack after a well explained response and an FoS from spolium. no comfort at all. " - pinging some Ice reads town
106. ask a meta question to budja concerning Ice - bad, where did that come from?
123. answer to spolium - ok
127. more reply to spolium - waste of time bit shifty, no like; promise of reread
129. reply to lynx over ice meta - slight TR
135. suspicion on my sex, why, am I calling your penis into question? a little jokey with RC; ask if RC think made a good case against budja - null though not like much question as it looks throwaway
149. some replies to RC ; press Jebus - the fact that don mainly does echoes is starting to grate on my nerves
162. three pointed question to gads
165. FOS JEB for lurker L-1 - dunno, true caution or know i'm town?
176. a spirited post which sounds genuine, but would be easy to fake as it is mostly general consideration

Milding, nothing to make waves no drive as it seems. Kinda hypocrite on my lurking: was one of the first to jump, but since criticisms appear to be my biggest champion. Willing to lynch.

magis/plonky:

6. RV magis
11. point out wolf's vote not true
14. defend and say his vote was random - a little jumpy maybe
147. ----------------->plonky, what a cute avatar

Nothing. Waiting on.

Lynx:

7. RV Goat
43. says about to replace out, agree with enough rhyme sentiment, long post for that
52. says don't like budja vote because think Ice vote was serious - this is in essence a repeat of the 'piggyback' argument
65. more stuff about budja and baselessness of 'pressure vote', seems to back off budja; UNVOTE
78. VOTE ME - do not like, please spare me the cliche argument; FOS gads for turning this into a lurker hunt - huh, contradication
86. says like Ice, a bit of relevant opinion on how scum play - ok ; relevant remark on the spolium - soft
88. convenient excuse what?
93. Nice tidy reply but not saying much of anything
100. reply to Ice - nice and tidy, but still no big stance on anything - pinging
128. thinks goat is right on fhq and I; thinks ice evaded question; reasnable assessement of my play if a little bit hypocrite in accusation of others, lynx was first to jump
130. recognize was wrong about don.
139. not that it was addressed to you, I think it is fun for the game alright.
152. ok question directed at RC, gads, jebus
169. address gads - the gads case date back to what, page 2 - fishing at the end of that post, kinda
171. ok reasoning about my lynching

Milky play all the way, no definite stance on anything, also proves to be quite the hypocrite about people jumping on my wagon thing. But couple of keen observation.

Low danger in keeping around a little.

Wolf/jebus:

9. half serious v Magis: defending RC?
12. clarify, says magis defend gads
23. says magis been defensive - a little harsh, but okay to start of dis I suppose; get a little self righteous about Ice9' vote - TR overall
132----------->Jebus replace in
141. funny mispelling of spolium into 'spoliom', very funny word that;ok post, a little hazy on the why of everything but null
142. kinda funny vote, merits questionning - i always think jebus is a girl
154. vague but ok answer to spolium on all front - wrong about spolium imo tho; queer, both game I remember with Jebus, I was scum - maybe scumslip here
155. clarify, pressure the lurker vote?
156. say gads last post felt pro town - legitimate reason
158. ok reply to spo
163. I'm not getting the logic behind this, if you think I'm anti-town town, what's the point in putting me at L-1? especially since you seem to have bigger suspicions elsewhere? what does my getting lynched would be in aid of? why should I talk at L 1 if I have decided not to since, you know, you think I'm town? - bad jebus, don't assume anything about how people should play their game

Mild, wolf was kinda TR, but Jebus is hard to read atm. To be kept around for observation.

Budja:

10. RV AZHREI
32. Wagon hop Wolf - neutral
41. says rhymes were confusing, says third vote to provoke discussion - hard to tell, have to see more
53. says not trying to piggyback sus, rhyme as excuse - am acutally ok with this
60. posed answer to goat - like it despite being appeasing
80. ask me to look back - ok
105. budja says everything is flowers and sunshine - no liky
107. quick reply to don
111. feels goat is pressing hard on gads
153. agree with lynx on jebus and also ask for clarification
167. Interpret as you will

Hypocrite play at its best, have contributed exactly nada since that third vote and some defending of self.

High danger: willing to lynch

goat:

13. RV ME, pirate reference, maybe buddying or not
28. jokey with Az - ok
38. ask budja if not a litlle backward
40. Agree with me, ask don for a recap of his vote - ok
47. question budja "catching suspicion on Wolf" vs "sparking discussion" - ok questions
56. says don't see piggyback for budj - good; says 'later scumtell' scummy - milding vibe from this one, seems to be a slight change of angle while still an attack of budja, kinda looks 'see I'm subtle'
57. more budja pressing - almost conversational
59. explain his case on budja - seems to be nitpickin, take long sentence to do it; moot point about "what kind of discussion because" because discussion is generated as he speaks - too nitpicky, too explanatory - pinging
63. response to spolium - I dislike this kinda post, arguing about something in lenght while not at the same time taking a real stance
66. good point about red; somethig about diverging definition of piggybacking - bizarre question, the way I understand it piggybacking is def scummy; upgrade vote on me because I'm posting in other game - ok, but kinda pointless
69. VOTE GADS - a passionate post by previous standard - ok reasons but not ones I would have cited: to watch for omgus
71. ok reply to Ice, ok justification of suspicions on me
79. prod don about rest of the game; not sure what the 'how pro town' is about, FOS ME - ok reaction
84. criticism of people jumping on me - ok
58. meta on Azhrei
97. reply to spolium's hypocrisy attack - long and lenghty post, nothing much of reproach - thing with goat is it s always nulltell and achieving that in defense is easy
103. call it in for a gads wagon - little support for you because people are distrustful of you, my call on it is that it isn't that strong a case
108. reply to spolium about 'shifting emphasis' - ok ; this post actually looks pretty good by all standard - although the nagging suspicion that goat may just be good enough to pull it off is persistent and to look good in defense is easy...TR
110. big long post, just don't see the point -not liking the peaceful tone, where I town in goat's place I would be taking the mickey out of spolium and his sophisticate looking but rather simple case by now
114. reply spolium; the first part is ok; good comeback; a little prod to me - hmm wanna shift suss on me that you feel a little heat? overall TR though
119. very nice and civil conclusion to headbutt with spolium it seems - scumlink to watch
120. tidy reply to spolium. well this kinda post raise my hackles, very undergoggy
136. decide to continue pressing gads
140. ask me why I am lurking
144. question jebus' vote. where did i say that i had no intention of playing?
168. seems to find putting lurker at L1 acceptable; would it means you'd go along with a lurker lynch
177. what do I expect to gain? amusement for myself and who know, maybe insight.

Milky play, convictions seems to teeter out in the course of lenghty argument. But case wasn't half bad by this town's standard.

Low danger in keeping around a little more.

Ice9:

15. V WOLF, says his case is bad
30. calling for a lynch on Wolf on the ground of what seems to be for grasping at straw - a litlle grasping himself but hard to say
31. having fun with the game - dunno TR
44. don't believe wolf's were in jest, says red trying to cover for him - I don't like this kind of post with insinuation instead of accusation or questionning, but too early to tell
70. good point about wolf, seems to be unforgiving about budja; do not like the 'holy alarm bell passage' and the whole unforgiving act' - shows very little nuance and make allegation on spolium the same way as before; agrees with goat on everything bar pulling the trigger - disagreed; FOS GADS, VOTE BUDJA; good point about lurker hunt
83. still seems to be having a biff with spolium - can't say i agree but this post read town, more a little obtuse town to be exact
91. seems to be dropping spolium, a series of kinda relevant questions - likey but cumlik spolium to watch out for
94. well put together and relevant reply to lynx - like
102. a pique a spolium
160. back post
178. busy

Had his moment of TR when attacing wolf then spolium. Petered out to nothing subsequently.

Low danger in keeping aroud a little more.

Spolium:

16. RV GADS
17. another joke on the RV - trying to hard to make it look random?
19. bizarre jumpiness, bait for banter, yet very quick to say 'only jest'
21, 22. clearing confusion, reafirm only joke - looks nervy
33. response to don, a little dramatic maybe, the friend acusation seems a litte too obvious - hard to tell if it's the style or what
36. general warning about word use - do not like
48. a re-say about rhymes, and a bit of 'look me town' - do not like
58. defend budja, anti-town=/=scum; relevant remark on goat's questionning - like
61. kinda defend budja, good point about rhetorical question - me like
73. replys to Ice - nice and tidy till a burst till the end - can't say I disagree VOTE ICE9, omgus watch
74. write post in draft - serious business is serious, may be scummy
90. reply to Ice, nice and tidy. "as I haven't come across many townies who risk this sort of play" - scumslip? - interesting sophisticate looking case on goat, the contradiction is there but it is kinda nitpicking, townies are very hypocrite creatures too
96. something about urgency of drawing people's attention away on Az' part - a little convoluted maybe, I don't like this kind of open ended accusation, seems to be suggesting Ice/Az - if spolium is scum, he is the manipulative kind - pinging some
104. still seems to be calling out goat for contradication - this is starting to ping a lot - contradictions pursued to that extent are what scumcase are made of and the amount of suspicion put on goat is not in line with possible offense; defends gads - null
109. still pursuing goat, I kinda can see where it comes from but I'm not liking because it looks like nitpicking; a lot of defending gads - enough so that gads doesn't look like scum anymore; hmm nice writing actually looks very much town and no emotional manip in sight - but I don't like the case on Ice at all because, well Ice looks pretty town to me
112. this post actually looks quite good, or more acurately it bullies you by sheer confidence into thinking that it is quite good - oh woe is us people with little brains, easily impressed by good command of english - still here the case behind it all is rather slim, so why convolute it - hmm, me decide me likey anyway
117. UNVOTE - wait did you ever vote goat in the first place? I don't think so. seems to be dropping the case on goat maybe townie honesty
119. a string of relevant question, amusingly not letting go of goat
122. agreement with goat, ok
125. pressing don - ok
145. relevant question to jebus;
148. read ' a little for the sake of being contrary'
157. another pointed question toward jebus
173. fraid of jester it seems, beginning to lean toward a me vote
175. same to you as to jebus - do not presume to know how other people should play.

Same as goat.

[/u]Azhrei:[/u]
27. RV DON
29. jokey with goat
42. says enough rhyme
54. says finding budja a bit suss as well - starting to look scummy
82. VOTE SPRING because lurking; comment on budja is that has to reread; not quite sure what happened to gads either - sucky post with sucky vote on me: not indicative interest in getting more out of me, more like seeing a easy lynch
137. Azee offers apology
179. UNVOTE - busy

Nada contribution. High danger because I know he does better as town.

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

So in no particular order, atm I'm willing to lynch: Azhrei, Gads, Don, Bujda.

[Azhrei]

Spring, I've actually requested that I be replaced by the mod, as I don't have time for this game in addition to my others. Please don't take my lack of contribution here as a indication of scumminess as opposed to your game. I managed to get that one under control, as it was somewhat less confusing. I just haven't had the time to get through this one, and that's why I'm leaving.

I'm really sorry that I've screwed you all round, and I hope my replacement does better.

[TonyMontana]

Azhrei

has indeed requested replacement
Tell your friends and family.

6 days

until deadline

[Budja]

Well I guess no-one can criticize you for lack of content anymore. That post was very insightful.

You do make a good point that I haven't said much lately. I have let this game fall down my priorities a bit. I'll fix this soon.

[fhqwhgads]

Urgh,

Wall o text, I'm going to be honest and say I only read the notes on me, and the conclusions on the rest. I have to say, at least you're playing along now, and knows what is going on in the game (it seems almost better than I do). I can't say I like your gameplay so far, but I can't fault your grasp of the game in that post.

The only problem really is, although it is a good summary, it contains very little content in the sense where anyone can question your motives (for good or bad); I might be wrong on that, should read the notes on the others as well, but I can't say you're making it easy for me.

Which makes me even more confused of where to go with my vote. I'm rather hoping Ice is going to say something soon, he's been IMA since the "I'm not responding to your OMGUS" argument.

If something good doesn't come soon, I'm going to have to seriously re-evaluate everyone in this game.

[don_johnson]

SL: you have an interesting take on my play. when i get a chance i will do pbp for where you seem to have missed the boat. don't see myself as a hypocriter on the lurking call. i didn't argue against voting for lurkers, i argued against lynching them. and my input has been pretty consistent. posting your notes does not make you town and it seems you call me out for echoing, yet that is all your notes seem to do themselves.

FoS: RedCoyote

for suggesting a policy lynch, which i have already stated my distaste for.

Spring: if that is going to be your only contribution, besides a vote before deadline, i suggest you request replacement.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Spring finally you have stepped up to the plate adding something to this game, thank you. Few things though, you criticize a good amount of players for timid play, then you throw suspicions around a few people. After all that you never place your vote. You say people you're willing to lynch, but you don't take a stance yourself and commit to somebody. Seems to me like you're waiting for more support on one of your suspicons to actually lay your vote down. Timid much? Hypocritical much? Yes and yes.

Though it comes off as pro-town posting a huge analysis like you've done, you've evaded any read on interactions with other players. By using this stunt, you've avoided participating in the random stage and chyming in with your thoughts on other player's arguments. Which kinda makes you the most "milky" person playing right now. You're lurking move doesn't clear you of that.

Last side note, I don't see how I was hypocritical for jumping on your wagon when I have been consistently laying my thoughts down. How is it hypocritical when I wasn't lurking myself?

[Goatrevolt]

SL: Why no vote? You call out people for "milky" play, but then exhibit that exact behavior by not placing a vote 6 days out from deadline and listing four players you are willing to lynch but no order of preference.

Budja: You're voting WolfBlitzer. Why?

Don_Johnson: You FoS RedCoyote, but aren't voting anyone right now. Why a FoS? Where's your vote? Looking back I see you FoS Jebus earlier but no vote as well there. Are you afraid to vote?

Fhq: I'd suggest you re-evaluate now.

[Goatrevolt]

I guess Lynx had the same idea. I agree with everything he said minus:

Though it comes off as pro-town posting a huge analysis like you've done, you've evaded any read on interactions with other players.

I don't consider huge analysis posts to be inherently pro-town.

[springlullaby]

Spring finally you have stepped up to the plate adding something to this game, thank you. Few things though, you criticize a good amount of players for timid play, then you throw suspicions around a few people. After all that you never place your vote. You say people you're willing to lynch, but you don't take a stance yourself and commit to somebody. Seems to me like you're waiting for more support on one of your suspicons to actually lay your vote down. Timid much? Hypocritical much? Yes and yes.

Though it comes off as pro-town posting a huge analysis like you've done, you've evaded any read on interactions with other players. By using this stunt, you've avoided participating in the random stage and chyming in with your thoughts on other player's arguments. Which kinda makes you the most "milky" person playing right now. You're lurking move doesn't clear you of that.

Last side note, I don't see how I was hypocritical for jumping on your wagon when I have been consistently laying my thoughts down. How is it hypocritical when I wasn't lurking myself?

1. You are mistaken, my non vote is not indicative of timidity, it is simply indicative of non preference in the names I listed. If I had multiple votes, I would be voting all of them. I'm amending my read of Az here because I did indeed miss that he has asked for replacement, but consider that I'm committed to all three.

2. I'm not accusing you of being hypocrite for jumping on my wagon, my accusation stem from the fact that you did so, yet criticized others for doing the same.

Case in point post 78:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &&start=75

In that post you manage to vote me for lurking and FOS gads for wanting lurkerhunt in the next paragraph.

3. As for my "evading interaction blabla", I think your complaint is pointless and rather after the fact. I made a choice in how I wanted to play this game, you make up your own mind on whether you think it's scummy or not.

[springlullaby]

SL: you have an interesting take on my play. when i get a chance i will do pbp for where you seem to have missed the boat. don't see myself as a hypocriter on the lurking call. i didn't argue against voting for lurkers, i argued against lynching them. and my input has been pretty consistent. posting your notes does not make you town and it seems you call me out for echoing, yet that is all your notes seem to do themselves.

FoS: RedCoyote

for suggesting a policy lynch, which i have already stated my distaste for.

Spring: if that is going to be your only contribution, besides a vote before deadline, i suggest you request replacement.

Bizarre non sequiture in there. I wonder what made your mind jump from your first paragraph to Red Coyote then back to me again.

On the subject of replacement, I will make it clear that I will not do so. Now please tell me what do you propose to gain from my being replaced.

[springlullaby]

SL: Why no vote? You call out people for "milky" play, but then exhibit that exact behavior by not placing a vote 6 days out from deadline and listing four players you are willing to lynch but no order of preference.

See answer to Lynx.

Beside, I stated my willingness to lynch 3 persons, what is soft in that?

[Goatrevolt]

SL: Why no vote? You call out people for "milky" play, but then exhibit that exact behavior by not placing a vote 6 days out from deadline and listing four players you are willing to lynch but no order of preference.

See answer to Lynx.

Beside, I stated my willingness to lynch 3 persons, what is soft in that?

The lack of follow through.

[springlullaby]

Do you seriously want to argue this point?

I may not be voting, but I'm also not committing anykind of vague vote which can be retracted to be 'pressure' or 'reaction' or whatever later on. What I give you is written words stating clearly that at this point in the game, I find gad, don, and budja scummy enough to lynch either.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Spring finally you have stepped up to the plate adding something to this game, thank you. Few things though, you criticize a good amount of players for timid play, then you throw suspicions around a few people. After all that you never place your vote. You say people you're willing to lynch, but you don't take a stance yourself and commit to somebody. Seems to me like you're waiting for more support on one of your suspicons to actually lay your vote down. Timid much? Hypocritical much? Yes and yes.

Though it comes off as pro-town posting a huge analysis like you've done, you've evaded any read on interactions with other players. By using this stunt, you've avoided participating in the random stage and chyming in with your thoughts on other player's arguments. Which kinda makes you the most "milky" person playing right now. You're lurking move doesn't clear you of that.

Last side note, I don't see how I was hypocritical for jumping on your wagon when I have been consistently laying my thoughts down. How is it hypocritical when I wasn't lurking myself?

1. You are mistaken, my non vote is not indicative of timidity, it is simply indicative of non preference in the names I listed. If I had multiple votes, I would be voting all of them. I'm amending my read of Az here because I did indeed miss that he has asked for replacement, but consider that I'm committed to all three.

2. I'm not accusing you of being hypocrite for jumping on my wagon, my accusation stem from the fact that you did so, yet criticized others for doing the same.

Case in point post 78:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &&start=75

In that post you manage to vote me for lurking and FOS gads for wanting lurkerhunt in the next paragraph.

3. As for my "evading interaction blabla", I think your complaint is pointless and rather after the fact. I made a choice in how I wanted to play this game, you make up your own mind on whether you think it's scummy or not.

1.Saying you're suspicious of multiple people is fine. What I can pose to you now is who do you find the the most suspicious out of the three? Usually indicative of the vote you cast, but seeing as you didn't place your vote I'd like to know who you believe is the optimal lynch out of the three and why.

2. Calling out people for not posting and people who are clearly here and not posting are two completely different things. I don't know why the others were inactive or most people I consider it a null tell when it happens. When you deliberately chose to be quiet it was suspicious to me.

3. It's evident I already have.