Mini 737 - Hack Poetry Mafia (Game Over)

[Goatrevolt]

So who do you think is scum, then?

[RedCoyote]

Incidently. what does everyone think of millar13's "If i said i was mafia and wanted you all dead...what would you do to me?" from the end of D1?

Red herring. Frankly, I think he's going to be replaced. The statement itself seems like a thirteen year old's attempt at making a few waves in the game without having to really go back, read through the game, and get up to speed.

---

Um...no. Your defense of spring wasn't milky at all. Your stance on her was. If saying the attacks on spring are bad, and then throwing suspicion on the people making the attacks isn't a defense of spring, then please explain what would constitute a defense.

I'm totally lost when it comes to the "he hated on my WIFOM but used a WIFOMy defense himself" argument. I highly doubt either situation is actually WIFOM but I'd like to hear a summary of this nonetheless.

As I've addressed with you before Goat, I was a bit forward at suspecting those who were calling spring out. My response to that was because you were pressuring spring much more than anyone else, which made it seem like you considered her to be worse than other players. Basically I was reading the posts like so,

Goat: yeah budja and fhq are bad... but spring why did you do this? Why didn't you do this? You were scummy for this. You are scummy here. Explain why this happened, and what made you think this?
don: spring is so scummy read this post this is all misrepresentation... when I said this I meant this how can you think I meant this? You are strawmanning and you are misrepresenting you are very scum. RC and you are scum.
Spolium: RC why would you defend spring!!! goat makes good points against spring definitely.
Lynx: oh, spring, this post... I don't like it your lurking and everything seems very scummy
fhq: spring is definitely misreading so much I re-read it it looks sooooo scummy
Budja: well at first I liked spring but then I re-read it is all bad she is totally misrepresenting everything
Goat: yeah RC don't defend her spring needs to answer for this this this this she is acting extremely scummy

Yeah, so, very basic there, but basically you can see how the momentum is definitely being steered away from Budja here.

I don't see how my stance on her was milky at all. I made it clear that I

couldn't

defend her lurking during the beginning of the game and I

would

support a policy lynch on her if necessary. I said that I found her much more town than the rest of you did and I tried to explain how Budja and fhq were the better selections during D1.

A defense of spring would be more like, "I will not vote spring, as to her lurking, well, the ends justify the means."

---

I'm not implying anything - the mention of a third scum just stands out to me. It could suggest that you consider it likely for there to be a third scum, or perhaps you have special information which leads you to believe it. Maybe you just threw it in there to imply that anyone casting suspicion on Spring could be a third scum, or maybe you were trying to highlight what you saw to be a ridiculous situation.

I think it's more likely that there are 3 scum than there are 2, that's what I would consider the norm for a 12 person game. I'm more inclined to ask you why you would imply that a player assuming three scum seems out of the ordinary than to question whether or not Goat has some sort of information.

---

Jebus, I think you need to address Goat's 394 because I am also interested in the answer.

Mod, please prod millar13 and Plonky

.

already been done.

---

do you mind explaining this? exactly where and what was my attempt at "hi-jacking" the lynch?

Namely this quote,

redcoyote and [spring] are sitting atop my list for reasons already laid out. budja? wheres the case on budja? can someone list his scumtells?

other than his original "slip" in the poetry phase i haven't found a whole lot "scummy" from him.

"suspicious", yes, but there are a good number on non contributors in this game right now and that seems to be the biggest mark against him. i have seen alot of votes for budja, but i haven't seen much of a case. sorry, but that is my opinion. i have no problem voting to lynch before deadline, but

i see no reason to hastily string up a player who could just be "bad town"

. both you and rc seem to be laying out deliberatly crafted misinformation. i'd rather see one of the two of you swing.

(emphasis added).

There's no denying you put yourself out on behalf of Budja, right now I'm trying to decide if that was as a scumpartner coming to Budja's aid or as a townie who was seriously delibrating the lynch.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

I'm gonna give my brief stance on everyone:

Spolium- I think there's a decent chance he bussed Budja. He layed his vote primarily for the deadline and when it was extended he didn't really press Budja any further(though not many on the Budja wagon did after the extension, but I feel his vote was the only one laid largely due to the impending deadline. Once it was on he simply left it on and didn't really address it any further.) Another thing that sticks out to me was the back and forth between Goat earlier in the game. Spolium sticking up for Budja somewhat eased the pressure off him.

DO- Out of all the people on the wagon of Budja, i feel like DO is the most likely to have bussed Budja. He layed down the L-1 vote with little to coment on besides the fact that Budja was pretty obviously scummy. I think, At this point, it was pretty apparent that Budja was gonna be the lynch candidate of the day after my vote. So DO had no trouble dropping the deadweight that Budja had become. His proposal today to lynch the uncountered doctor is pretty scummy. I think it could have just been a poor townie proposal as well though.

Don- Don was the first to attack Budja way back to get us out of the random phase. He dropped his vote fairly easily and never really focused on Budja the rest of the day. His meta excuse for not seeing Budja as scum could be valid, I just don't have anyway of knowing that. Another thing that I found suspect was the whole discussion thing like I pointed out earlier. He made a big deal out of continuing useful discussion, then never added anything after that. I felt like this was an attempt to give off a pro-town vibe to make up for his absence on the Budja wagon.

RC- My major problem with him is the defense of Spring. He continues to claim that was merely an opinion, I just don't think my mind will be changed about the matter. Definite possibility of scum buddying up to a townie. However, I didn't read any strong connection between him and Budja. All of his interactions with Budja came off genuinely town vs. scum to me.

FHQ- Didn't like his earlier play. Especially the scapegoat call on Budja scum and change of direction to a lurker hunt. I can see a possible link between FHQ and Budja. He did recover thoughout Day 1 for me slightly.

Jebus- Wasn't a fan of his last few posts at the end of Day 1. The obvscum remarks came off fairly scummy to me. I agree that Goat caught him changing the time frame of his remarks. My gut sees him as town though.

Goat- The one player I'm confident enough to say is town. He was the one who really pressed Budja, his attacks have been consistent, he's cast that at many different players, and he's nailed many good points to me.

Spring- I believe the doc claim and she's very low on my suspicion list now. I do feel like your posts have lacked as much as your previous content and lacked the same level of scum hunting you expressed earlier in the game ever since your claim(More Busy maybe?). Spring, you got lucky that you're still around today. You're basically a confirmed innocent and i feel you're a good player. I think you can seriously help the town pinpoint these last scum.

Millar- After rereading and knowing Budja is one of the scum, Ice looked much better in my eyes. I just don't think he was active long enough to get a good enough read on him. Need to hear more.

Plonky- No read at all. No content. Plonky if you don't think you can handle the game you should seriously consider just replacing out already.

Now my top three at the moment are Don, DO, and Spolium for the strongest connections I see to Budja. With FHQ an honorable mention.

Vote:Don

I'm gonna have my vote on him for now at least. I'd like to see where this wagon goes.

I'm tired and for now I'm off to bed. I may do a closer read in the near future but tonight I'm done. Goodnight mafiascum.

[Spolium]

Don- His meta excuse for not seeing Budja as scum could be valid, I just don't have anyway of knowing that.

Actually, the meta defence was mine. You can read the thread I was talking about HERE - pages 12-14 in particular cover a push on a Budja lynch.

[Spolium]

I think it's more likely that there are 3 scum than there are 2, that's what I would consider the norm for a 12 person game. I'm more inclined to ask you why you would imply that a player assuming three scum seems out of the ordinary than to question whether or not Goat has some sort of information.

It's not that I think three scum is out of the ordinary; I simply have no basis for comparison in a game this size so I can only really go by what the more experienced among you suggest to be likely.

I wondered whether Goat had special information because - unless I'm mistaken - he was the first to imply the presence of a third scum.

[don_johnson]

wow. another game now where the case against me is that i appear to be town. i really have no defence. i do like how RC bolds the parts of the quote that fit his case and doesn't seem to acknowledge what the rest of the post says.

lynx: i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine. can you provide some examples?

my vote would be on RC right now, but DO is off the charts with starting an uncounterclaimed-doc-who-may-have-prevented-a-nightkill bandwagon.

now the bad news: i think plonky dissappeared, he's just been replaced in another game. and millar? good god, if we get anything useful out of him i will be amazed. he seems to enjoy spouting nonsense...

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Don- His meta excuse for not seeing Budja as scum could be valid, I just don't have anyway of knowing that.

Actually, the meta defence was mine. You can read the thread I was talking about HERE - pages 12-14 in particular cover a push on a Budja lynch.

I wasn't very clear. The post I was referring to was here:

i didn't see the tells outside of the poetry phase. alot of what people were calling "slips" seemed like honest mistakes. i am in another game with budja and he is playing similar. the only thing that drew my attention was his voting pattern. in hindsight he seemed to be hopping the popular cases these last few pages. damn tunnel vision. i actually thought that one of you two might be doc. if budja hadn't claimed scum here i would have asked for more discussion on the counterclaim. c'est la vie! good start.

Your meta defense is a separate incident (From a brief skim of that game it looked to me like Budja was much more vocal. I may read the game closer a little later).Here Don's reason for not voting Budja based upon a meta read.

I'm debating the idea that Budja make a very weak distance effort with his vote on Don. There wasn't much heat on Don at the time. Budja's scum play strikes me as a follower, not a leader. I don't think Budja would have lead a case on somebody which is why I think he was comfortable with laying his vote on his partner. I don't recall Don ever really commenting on the vote. When I questioned Budja about his switch to RC, he replied that he never really found Don scummy and that he only layed down the vote because the pressure on his lack of any real stance. I think Budja just used the vote to distance from Don plain and simple.

lynx: i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine. can you provide some examples?

Frankly, It's more of a gut call based upon my reread which I tend to use more as the we proceed further into the game.

Now I reread purely RC and I've realized that his vote has been on since the RVS. He continually questioned Budja's though throughout the earlier party of the game. Now It's a pretty strong bus to keep your vote on your partner all of Day 1. Towards the end of the day RC got somewhat wrapped up in the Spring defense/opinion and most of his posts addressed that alone towards the end, but he was being attacked by many players. So he had plenty to respond to keep him busy. I do find it a little strange that he went a little quiet about Budja after page 10 or so. However I find his continued expression of suspicion enough to not see a strong connection between the two. I find it a little difficult to buy that he'd ride his partner that much.

All in all I don't see a Budja/RC scumpair in their interactions. I do find him scummy for his refusal to admit to the defense of Spring(strong scum town buddying possibility). Especially when he so easily admitted his flip flop about FHQ earlier today. Don, if this isn't sufficient for you, then I could go pull some quotes of RC's continued suspicion of Budja(there were a good amount). Though it wouldn't be a huge help because it's just a matter of whether you believe them to be sincere and you could see it very different from myself. This is just how I read it.

[Deuxieme Octopus]

DO- Out of all the people on the wagon of Budja, i feel like DO is the most likely to have bussed Budja. He layed down the L-1 vote with little to coment on besides the fact that Budja was pretty obviously scummy. I think, At this point, it was pretty apparent that Budja was gonna be the lynch candidate of the day after my vote. So DO had no trouble dropping the deadweight that Budja had become. His proposal today to lynch the uncountered doctor is pretty scummy. I think it could have just been a poor townie proposal as well though.

Any reasons I posted for voting Budja would have been redundant. Of course there's a good amount of WIFOM in what I'm going to say but, if I was scum would I drop a heavy vote like that without giving at least a paragraph or two of bullshit to prop it up? I could have at least taken the time to quote a few of the others on the bandwagon and then reiterated them. But I did not. The case against Budja was so self-apparent, and I really shouldn't even have to defend it since, hey guess what he was scum. I think if anything, what you claimed was scummy in my vote was the least scummy aspect of it.

[millar13]

But who in fact is guility of being wrong? hmmmm

[Lynx The Antithesis]

DO- Out of all the people on the wagon of Budja, i feel like DO is the most likely to have bussed Budja. He layed down the L-1 vote with little to coment on besides the fact that Budja was pretty obviously scummy. I think, At this point, it was pretty apparent that Budja was gonna be the lynch candidate of the day after my vote. So DO had no trouble dropping the deadweight that Budja had become. His proposal today to lynch the uncountered doctor is pretty scummy. I think it could have just been a poor townie proposal as well though.

Any reasons I posted for voting Budja would have been redundant. Of course there's a good amount of WIFOM in what I'm going to say but, if I was scum would I drop a heavy vote like that without giving at least a paragraph or two of bullshit to prop it up? I could have at least taken the time to quote a few of the others on the bandwagon and then reiterated them. But I did not. The case against Budja was so self-apparent, and I really shouldn't even have to defend it since, hey guess what he was scum. I think if anything, what you claimed was scummy in my vote was the least scummy aspect of it.

I completely agree you shouldn't just rehash arguments and pull anything out of your ass just to seem like adding somewthing to the case. The simple fact that he was scum just doesn't automatically make you town though. I see the highest chance of bussing coming from you. You could've at least stated which aspects of the cases on Budja you agreed with. If my claim wasn't the most scummy component of your vote, then what was? It's pretty stupid to ask you about this. It's just the way you used the word "least" makes me believe that you felt there was worst elements of your vote.

Considering that most of the town has shown disapproval for your plan to lynch the

claimed

doctor, are you still supportive of it? Is there any alternate suspects you have?

But who in fact is guility of being wrong? hmmmm

What?

[Goatrevolt]

RC, I spent more time debating my attack on Spring with you than I did actually pressuring spring.

I'd also still like a summarizing of the WIFOM argument between you and Spolium. Either of you are welcome to provide it.

[Spolium]

Actually, the meta defence was mine. You can read the thread I was talking about HERE - pages 12-14 in particular cover a push on a Budja lynch.

I wasn't very clear. The post I was referring to was here:

(etc.)

Okay, that makes more sense.

Regarding your comments on me:

Spolium- I think there's a decent chance he bussed Budja. He layed his vote primarily for the deadline and when it was extended he didn't really press Budja any further(though not many on the Budja wagon did after the extension, but I feel his vote was the only one laid largely due to the impending deadline. Once it was on he simply left it on and didn't really address it any further.) Another thing that sticks out to me was the back and forth between Goat earlier in the game. Spolium sticking up for Budja somewhat eased the pressure off him.

Defending Budja in any way was a pretty stupid move on my part - I'll admit that - but it's somewhat disingenuous of you to describe my vote as "the only one laid largely due to the impending deadline" without considering that

you

asked me who my prime candidate was "in the face of a deadline". I answered your question, but I didn't place the vote itself for deadline related reasons at all - I placed it because I had waited long enough for Budja to pick up his game and thought his flip would yield more information than most others.

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

I'd also still like a summarizing of the WIFOM argument between you and Spolium. Either of you are welcome to provide it.

In post 251 RC criticised cases on Spring for being WIFOM, whiched seemed hypocritical in light of one of the sentences at the start of the same post: "my whole point is it just seems so unlikely for scum to draw that much attention to themselves, especially a more seasoned player like spring".

I questioned this contradiction in this post. Following that...

RC (300): "

Whether or not that position is derived in WIFOM is irrelevant because I'm not sping; I don't pretend to know why spring did or didn't do something.

"

In 306 I pointed out that I wasn't talking about his argument deriving from WIFOM, but rather the hypocrisy of his attempt to undermine multiple cases. I also questioned his "extensive white knighting" of Spring based on the WIFOM basis for his argument in 251.

RC (339): "

Just like calling my "defense" WIFOM is meaningless. I don't consider it a defense. [..] Without reading back, I don't think I've called another player out for a WIFOM argument on spring. I've said that many of the cases against her were derived from speculation, which is a different idea altogether.

"

That pretty much sums it up IMO.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Defending Budja in any way was a pretty stupid move on my part - I'll admit that - but it's somewhat disingenuous of you to describe my vote as "the only one laid largely due to the impending deadline" without considering that you asked me who my prime candidate was "in the face of a deadline". I answered your question, but I didn't place the vote itself for deadline related reasons at all - I placed it because I had waited long enough for Budja to pick up his game and thought his flip would yield more information than most others.

I think the fact that I asked you who you'd vote for clouded my thoughts about that matter and I just associated your vote with the deadline. I agree that it's wrong on my part to characterizer your vote in such a manner. I do still maintain that once you voted Budja you appeared to lose focus of him. It may have been your problems with RC that shifted your attention though.

[don_johnson]

I wasn't very clear. The post I was referring to was here:

i didn't see the tells outside of the poetry phase. alot of what people were calling "slips" seemed like honest mistakes.

i am in another game with budja and he is playing similar. the only thing that drew my attention was his voting pattern.

in hindsight he seemed to be hopping the popular cases these last few pages. damn tunnel vision. i actually thought that one of you two might be doc. if budja hadn't claimed scum here i would have asked for more discussion on the counterclaim.

c'est la vie! good start.

Your meta defense is a separate incident (From a brief skim of that game it looked to me like Budja was much more vocal. I may read the game closer a little later).

Here Don's reason for not voting Budja based upon a meta read

.

the majority of my post offered much more reasoning for my not voting budja than simply "meta". you imply that i did not vote budja based on meta. this is incorrect. not sure which game you are reading, but his early play seemed similar. i.e. budja seemed to not be much of a leader in either game. this, however, was only one part of my decision.

I don't recall Don ever really commenting on the vote.

don didn't.

When I questioned Budja about his switch to RC, he replied that he never really found Don scummy and that he only layed down the vote because the pressure on his lack of any real stance.

I think Budja just used the vote to distance from Don plain and simple

.

plausible, but unlikely. i wasn't on his wagon and i was in no danger of lynch at the time. how would the vote have "distanced" us? personally i interpreted the vote as a frustrated townie's attempt to scumhunt. though i felt spring's interpretations of my posts were misrep, i by no means claim to have been beyond suspicion and seeing as how budja's vote carried no wieght i felt no need to respond as i was concerned in finding actual scum. day 1 is never easy. i still don't read budja as scum.

lynx: i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine. can you provide some examples?

Frankly, It's more of a gut call based upon my reread which I tend to use more as the we proceed further into the game. [/quote]

i don't understand this. do you mean that you prefer gut to facts as the game progresses?

Now I reread purely RC and I've realized that his vote has been on since the RVS. He continually questioned Budja's though throughout the earlier party of the game. Now It's a pretty strong bus to keep your vote on your partner all of Day 1. Towards the end of the day RC got somewhat wrapped up in the Spring defense/opinion and most of his posts addressed that alone towards the end, but he was being attacked by many players. So he had plenty to respond to keep him busy. I do find it a little strange that he went a little quiet about Budja after page 10 or so. However I find his continued expression of suspicion enough to not see a strong connection between the two.

I find it a little difficult to buy that he'd ride his partner that much

.

i disagree. scum are desperate, as soon as the heat turned up on RCscum i don't see why he wouldn't be willing to bus his partner straight to the gallows. in fact, this seems to be a perfect example of a text book bus.

[Spolium]

I do still maintain that once you voted Budja you appeared to lose focus of him. It may have been your problems with RC that shifted your attention though.

That's probably true. I didn't have a great deal more to say about Budja either - he didn't defend himself from my arguments (nor did anyone else question them) so there wasn't much more for me to say on the matter until he fakeclaimed.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

My responses are in bold

I wasn't very clear. The post I was referring to was here:

i didn't see the tells outside of the poetry phase. alot of what people were calling "slips" seemed like honest mistakes.

i am in another game with budja and he is playing similar. the only thing that drew my attention was his voting pattern.

in hindsight he seemed to be hopping the popular cases these last few pages. damn tunnel vision. i actually thought that one of you two might be doc. if budja hadn't claimed scum here i would have asked for more discussion on the counterclaim.

c'est la vie! good start.

Your meta defense is a separate incident (From a brief skim of that game it looked to me like Budja was much more vocal. I may read the game closer a little later).

Here Don's reason for not voting Budja based upon a meta read

.

the majority of my post offered much more reasoning for my not voting budja than simply "meta". you imply that i did not vote budja based on meta. this is incorrect. not sure which game you are reading, but his early play seemed similar. i.e. budja seemed to not be much of a leader in either game. this, however, was only one part of my decision.

The only other reason I see in this that you saw his mistakes were honest slip ups. So I considered that your meta was a large reason for your lack of vote. The rest of the post seems all like reasons why you should've have seen Budja as scum such as the voting pattern and jumping on popular cases.

I don't recall Don ever really commenting on the vote

don didn't.

I think the fact that you didn't even acknowledge it is telling?

When I questioned Budja about his switch to RC, he replied that he never really found Don scummy and that he only layed down the vote because the pressure on his lack of any real stance.

I think Budja just used the vote to distance from Don plain and simple

.

plausible, but unlikely. i wasn't on his wagon and i was in no danger of lynch at the time. how would the vote have "distanced" us? personally i interpreted the vote as a frustrated townie's attempt to scumhunt. though i felt spring's interpretations of my posts were misrep, i by no means claim to have been beyond suspicion and seeing as how budja's vote carried no wieght i felt no need to respond as i was concerned in finding actual scum. day 1 is never easy. i still don't read budja as scum.

I think that he went after you was a distance attempt. Like I said it was a weak effort by Budja. But now knowing that he's scum, not town, the "frustrated townie" doesn't hold up. Any vote by scum on scum is a distance attempt. By expressing suspicion on you it makes you look less likely to partners. There were no votes on you and I don't believe that he would lead the charge against a townie. He saw an easy attack in his partner, and seeing you not respond to the vote only makes more inclined to see you as a pair. Just because you think the vote carries no weight I still don't think you should simply ignore it. I agree that day 1 isn't easy. Since we nailed scum, I think using him is the most informative way to start day 2

.

lynx: i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine. can you provide some examples?

Frankly, It's more of a gut call based upon my reread which I tend to use more as the we proceed further into the game.

i don't understand this. do you mean that you prefer gut to facts as the game progresses?

Not at all. But there are little 100% facts to go on besides investigations and other informative based power roles. Mafia is speculative in nature and I think many cases are made on feelings in general.

Now I reread purely RC and I've realized that his vote has been on since the RVS. He continually questioned Budja's though throughout the earlier party of the game. Now It's a pretty strong bus to keep your vote on your partner all of Day 1. Towards the end of the day RC got somewhat wrapped up in the Spring defense/opinion and most of his posts addressed that alone towards the end, but he was being attacked by many players. So he had plenty to respond to keep him busy. I do find it a little strange that he went a little quiet about Budja after page 10 or so. However I find his continued expression of suspicion enough to not see a strong connection between the two.

I find it a little difficult to buy that he'd ride his partner that much

.

i disagree. scum are desperate, as soon as the heat turned up on RCscum i don't see why he wouldn't be willing to bus his partner straight to the gallows. in fact, this seems to be a perfect example of a text book bus.

Yeah, but RC was on Budja all day. He didn't just turn up the pressure on Budja once it started heading his way. It's not impossible by any means I just believe otherwise. If you see a strong connection, then how come your votes on DO, and not RC. You said you placed it on DO for no other place to put it. It seems like you see something with Red.

[don_johnson]

you are wrong on my reasoning for my vote on DO, it is more than just "a place to put it". you are mischaracterizing my statements by excluding parts that are relevant. my suspicions on RC are documented in thread.

you have confirmed now that your vote on me is "gut" and that it is "speculative in nature" and not based on facts.

I think that he went after you was a distance attempt.

Like I said it was a weak effort by Budja.

But now knowing that he's scum, not town, the "frustrated townie" doesn't hold up. Any vote by scum on scum is a distance attempt.

i don't get you here. because i now know that he's scum, my thoughts from yesterday are now supposed to change? it seemed like a "frustrated townie attempting to scumhunt" type vote. if it was a weak effort by Budja, did you notice any strong efforts?

The only other reason I see in this that you saw his mistakes were honest slip ups. So I considered that your meta was a large reason for your lack of vote. The rest of the post seems all like reasons why you should've have seen Budja as scum such as the voting pattern and jumping on popular cases.

you should go to "THE DEREK ZOOLANDER SCHOOL FOR KIDS WHO DON'T READ GOOD". you missed this one:

i actually thought that one of you two might be doc.

sorry, but i'm not down with lynching players i think might be doc.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

you are wrong on my reasoning for my vote on DO, it is more than just "a place to put it". you are mischaracterizing my statements by excluding parts that are relevant. my suspicions on RC are documented in thread.

you have confirmed now that your vote on me is "gut" and that it is "speculative in nature" and not based on facts.

I do believe you said that you did say when you voted DO you said "for lack of better place to put my vote" which basically doesn't make it much better than just "a place to put it". If you're suspicions on RC are so well documented, then why isn't it on RC. Your vote on DO seems half hearted.

I have in no way confirmed that. That was in regards to my read of RC. I see a definite possibility of distancing between the two of you with Budja's vote on Day 1.

i don't get you here. because i now know that he's scum, my thoughts from yesterday are now supposed to change? it seemed like a "frustrated townie attempting to scumhunt" type vote. if it was a weak effort by Budja, did you notice any strong efforts?

I got you here and concede that your thoughts from yesterday wouldn't change. It still doesn't change the suspicion to me of you ignoring the vote which sticks out to me.

you should go to "THE DEREK ZOOLANDER SCHOOL FOR KIDS WHO DON'T READ GOOD". you missed this one:

i actually thought that one of you two might be doc.

sorry, but i'm not down with lynching players i think might be doc.

I'm not getting this reason still. You thought that one of the two of them was the doctor before or after their claims? My thing against you was why you weren't on the wagon in the first place not after their claims.(well inserted Zoolander reference boosts my respect for you at least)

[RedCoyote]

My major problem with him is the defense of Spring. He continues to claim that was merely an opinion, I just don't think my mind will be changed about the matter.

Just answer me one question Lynx, if player A made it clear he was prepared to vote player B based on policy despite not feeling very comfortable about it, is player A defending player B?

I'm not ashamed to admit I've had a change of heart on spring. Do I agree with the way she played this game? No, and I've said as much. She says, essentially, "Well I did it, now call me out for it or don't".

Look at this post in particular.

I accepted spring's explanation over Goat and fhq's speculations, and I argued with them (and later you and Spolium) about this difference in opinion.

I said in this post in particular that I

do not

agree with the way she played this game and I obviously meant that I

COULDN'T DEFEND

her play in this game. spring said that everyone should either put up or shut up in regards to her lurking. I chose to shut up, whereas a player like don or Goat chose to put up.

I just, I don't know how I can be more clear than that. I think it's very wrong to call my position on spring as her defender because I said, in so many words, that I couldn't defend her even if I wanted to. That didn't necessarily mean that I didn't accept her interpretations however, it just meant that while I disagreed with her play and I was willing to put those feelings aside for what I perceived as the two bigger threats to the game: Budja and fhq.

---

wow. another game now where the case against me is that i appear to be town. i really have no defence. i do like how RC bolds the parts of the quote that fit his case and doesn't seem to acknowledge what the rest of the post says.

I don't think you appear to be town at all, nor is my argument intended to give off that vibe. My intention is to analyze whether or not you meant genuinely that Budja seemed innocent to you in that post, or if you were actively trying to re-route or hijack the Budja bandwagon for other, ulterior motivations.

And of course I'm going to bold the parts that emphasize my point, why wouldn't I? Just because I'm not looking as closely at the little backdoors one leaves in a comment (e.g.

the case against budja seems bad.

sorry but that's my opinion.), doesn't mean I'm not reading them.

i don't see where RC's interactions with budja were very genuine.

I don't see how you can even make that argument. I'd go so far as to say I was Budja's primary attacker yesterday.

Now, if you want to claim it was a grandiose bus, that's another argument, but to say I didn't have a genuine stance against Budja would be an outright misinterpretation of me from the beginning of the game. I have never been unclear about my positions on Budja, and I consistently asked him to provide us with more, more, more.

---

When I questioned Budja about his switch to RC, he replied that he never really found Don scummy and that he only layed down the vote because the pressure on his lack of any real stance. I think Budja just used the vote to distance from Don plain and simple.

I agree with this point. Because of Budja's general hidden, silent presence in the overall game, I had forgotten that Budja had even voted don at one point. He had hysterically left his vote on WolfBlitzer for so long that I was convinced he wasn't taking his vote seriously.

This, upon a closer look, doesn't put don in any sort of positive light. He votes don in post 282 based on arguments other people (notably me) had made against don, without so much as asking don anything or pressuring him in any sort of meaningul way.

don's response to Budja's position is apparently ambivalence. At least, he never made any effort to say he was especially concerned about Budja's vote for the time it was on him.

don makes posts 285, 290, 296, 299, and 305.

Budja unvotes don and votes me in post 304 on the basis that I was seemingly coaching spring. don is unconcerned with any of this at the time, although in his posts he finds time to address spring, me, Jebus, and even millar.

I plan to continue looking at Budja's interactions with the players in this game, but if this trend is any indication, don's complete lack of concern with Budja's vote and opinions in this game could be extremely telling.

---

But who in fact is guility of being wrong? hmmmm

millar, do you care about this game at all? Please ask for a replacement if you aren't willing to play.

---

RC, I spent more time debating my attack on Spring with you than I did actually pressuring spring.

Heh.

I'd also still like a summarizing of the WIFOM argument between you and Spolium. Either of you are welcome to provide it.

I just don't consider it much of a point. The basic premise of the argument is that, ok, spring made her infamous post, and there are, as I see it, two schools of thought on how spring created that post. Either spring completely concocted the post based on a rereading the game after the fact, as you and fhq have both argued, or she had been keeping up with the game and making notes with each post, as she claimed and I have made clear I agree with.

My frustrations with the attacks on spring were that I see those people in your school as creating a WIFOM attack (e.g. scumspring would reread the game and completely make up these "notes"), Spolium's argument is that I have no ground to stand on when making that argument against y'all because my position on spring is just as WIFOMy (e.g. scumspring

wouldn't

try that because it would put too much of a spotlight on her).

I was admittedly a little confused with Spolium at first, and knowing how prone he is to framing me in a certain way in regards to my position on spring, I was rightfully hesistant to accept any interpretation he made (post 339) of my position.

Where I stand now is that the entire argument is null because anyway you slice it it is necessarily going to be WIFOM speculation over something only spring really knows. I'm more likely now than ever to accept her explanation given the fact that I believe her to be the town doctor.

[RedCoyote]

Mod: Sorry about the double post. Please erase one.

So people don't think you're crazy: Done and done

[Spolium]

RC, I didn't consider the WIFOM thing to be a strong sign of scumminess so much as a notable contradiction on your part - as Spring said earlier, townies can be hypocritical too. The thing that bothers me most about that whole exchange is your statement "

Just like calling my "defense" WIFOM is meaningless. I don't consider it a defense

" because you were resorting once again to playing the definition game.

if player A made it clear he was prepared to vote player B based on policy despite not feeling very comfortable about it, is player A defending player B?
[..]
I do not agree with the way she played this game and I obviously meant that I COULDN'T DEFEND her play in this game.

It doesn't matter if you were willing to vote her on the basis of a policy lynch; you were still defending her from criticism. By way of comparison, I was willing to vote Budja on the basis of unhelpful posts and maximum information gain, but when it comes down to it my criticisms of attacks on him were basically defensive,

irrespective of my willingness to lynch him

.

[RedCoyote]

Then I suppose we have a different definition of the word defense.

I mean, in that sense, you could just as easily argue I was defending Goat earlier in this game during a theory argument with you.

But, Spolium, again, that's similar to saying that every statement in regards to another player is either an attack or a defense, right?

The reason I don't see myself as a "spring defender" is that she was, at that time, still lower on my list. I didn't like her lurking either, nor did I like her back and forth with don, but I obviously didn't see it as bad as someone like fhq did. To me players like Budja and Jebus had larger transgressions to account for than the fact that spring didn't vote. In retrospect, I concede that I was overlooking the fact that Goat and you were still voting Budja, but that's about as much as I can give.

When you casually use the word defense to label anyone who has a disagreement with you over another player, I don't know, to me, it starts to lose its meaning.

[fhqwhgads]

But who in fact is guility of being wrong? hmmmm

wth?

[don_johnson]

I'm not getting this reason still. You thought that one of the two of them was the doctor before or after their claims? My thing against you was why you weren't on the wagon in the first place not after their claims.(well inserted Zoolander reference boosts my respect for you at least)

the thought occurred to me before the claim. first with spring, then with budja. why would i vote a player who i think may have a town pr?

[Spolium]

again, that's similar to saying that every statement in regards to another player is either an attack or a defense, right?

Not really. If you'd just said "I think Spring's post analysis was not written after the fact" and left it at that, then all would be well. I wouldn't consider that defence.

It was your active criticism of every non-lurking related argument set against her that was defensive, not the fact that you shared opinions of her.

Then I suppose we have a different definition of the word defense.

I really can't accept this. Numerous players

attacked

Spring for what they thought could be scumminess, and you argued - at length - that those points were invalid, effectively

resisting

those attacks. How can defence be defined as anything other than the act of resistance to an attack?

It strikes me as odd that you put a great deal of effort into rebutting attacks on Spring while at the same time hesitating to be seen as defending her; basically you have been trying to maintain a comfortable distance where:

- you'd look good if Spring flipped (or claimed without a counter-claim)
- you weren't directly "defending" her, reducing the chances that you'd be tagged as scum who knew she was town

This makes a whole lot of sense if you're scum, and the aggressive nature of your "opinion sharing" makes little sense if you're town, so I'm just going to leave this right here:

##vote: RedCoyote