Mini 780 - Chosen - Game over

[springlullaby]

Choose convinced camp.

Vote Lawrencelot

Fos Nuwen for not bandwagonning.

Hi Claus

[springlullaby]

What, 40+ pageview since last I checked in and only 2 meek random votes?

What are you lurkers afraid of?

[springlullaby]

Nuwen, your 17 comes off as weird. What do you mean by it?

[springlullaby]

Nuwen, your 17 comes off as weird. What do you mean by it?

I'd much rather gather everyone's ideas on theory than entertain the usual RVS rigmarole.

Weird?

Well, trying to push through the RSV is not, but the way you are doing it is, kinda, and I've got a couple of remarks. But you know what, I'll let you do your thing first. And comment afterwards.

[springlullaby]

springlullaby: What do you make of players who lament the lack of activity in a game without actually adding anything new themselves?

I would think that it's pretty scummy. Do mean to imply that I am such?

[springlullaby]

What, 40+ pageview since last I checked in and only 2 meek random votes?

What are you lurkers afraid of?

Not particularly indicative, it just sounded a little off to me.

It was a post to exhort people to participate. Why do you think it was off?

[springlullaby]

Nuwen, your 17 comes off as weird. What do you mean by it?

I'd much rather gather everyone's ideas on theory than entertain the usual RVS rigmarole.

Weird?

Well, trying to push through the RSV is not, but the way you are doing it is, kinda, and I've got a couple of remarks. But you know what, I'll let you do your thing first. And comment afterwards.

Make remarks now... the theory discussion is getting us nowhere. if you have insightful remarks on the game they would be much more useful than deciding what is or isn't a universal/absolute scumtell.

No. I want to observe this.

Btw, you are earning an automatic FOS for using ellipses, no kidding.

Fixed a quote tag. - Incog-Mod.

[springlullaby]

What does 'using ellipses' mean?

And discussing theory is always better than staying in the RVS q21, I'd call anyone who opposes it scum sooner than anyone who uses it, unless it distracts anyone from scumhunting, which won't really happen in the RVS.

Really - discussing theory is always better that RVS? The game staying in RVS would, eventually, achieve a lynch. It would be a bad lynch, most likely, but it would be a lynch. Theory discussion, on the other hand will eventually achieve... nothing.

unvote, vote nuwen.

Less theory, more scumhunting, please.

Unvote, vote q21

I think your grief with Nuwen's action is pretty artificial.

1. It can be argued that discussing theory does not help town, but it doesn't actually hurt town either, especially from what has been done in this game so far. I also think that in this case, regardless of Nuwen's motivation in asking them, her questions have provided a topic of discussion which in practicality has lead us out of the RSV. Your thoughts?
2. Scumhunting doesn't arise from nowhere: when you say 'more scumhunting please' what exactly do you have in mind? I think your call here is entirely empty.
3. I think your vote on Nuwen is also poor strategically for town: if you truly think that Nuwen is scum, motivated by leading town into theory molasses, why not wait a bit and observe is she really persists in being pointlessly theorical?
4. I disagree with the 'bad lynch is still a lynch' school of thinking. People are to be held responsible of their votes, period. And everyone is to do their best to find scum, even if this is day 1.


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

Regarding Nuwen and the remarks I had: I found it strange that she would say "at least one of you is town" in her questioning, it seemed unusual - but I have since reconnected the dots: she is prolly referencing the fact that this game is open with 2 scum.

Still, Nuwen, you say that your question were aimed at collecting precedence in where people stands theory wise. If so, why did you level them at three players in particular?

[springlullaby]

The votes on q21 are dumb. He is right and acting pro-townish.
ABR, aren't you ashamed of agreeing with SL's bullshit?

Olé, the big guns already? This is kinda surprising.

Nuwen's theory questions are spurious - she is starting from a misleading premise, and seems to be trying to shape the town's mind into a "one of these three is scum" mentality.

Is that a mistake on your part? Nuwen actually says 'at least one of your three is town'. Which is curious yes - although it can be explained by the fact that this is an open game with 2 scum, and I'm undecided whether it is scummy.

The worse thing
is that she is not putting her chips in the table while doing that, by refusing to make a case based on her theory questions.

I want to see what kinds of insight in terms of who is scum and who is town Nuwen's questions have brought her so far.

I think this is a bit exaggerated, q21 intervened very shortly after Nuwen asked her questions. Given his intervention I don't think anyone can say now if Nuwen would have made a case out of her questions by herself and without prompting. Which is one of my critique of q21, you can hardly reproach someone of something if you don't give them the occasion of making a move either way. Do you agree with this?

That said I do want to see what Nuwen has to say about all this now.

SL's vote is bad. It is a disagreement vote, and not a scumhunting vote.

I don't think that's true.

Also, she is misrepresenting q21, by saying he is not scumhunting. He is voting Nuwen and pushing a case, which is both scumhunting AND providing us with insights on q21's intention - much more than what Nuwen has done so far.

Were did I say that he wasn't scumhunting? I don't find his scumhunting satisfactory, that is totally different.

Also "bad lynch is still a lynch" is completely different from "people should not be accountable for their votes". Big misrep there. Vote patterns, even/specially in bad lynches are a great ways to hunt for scum.

No. I agree with vote pattern being good for scumhunting but what q21 said is something different. He said that the RSV stage would eventually lead to a lynch, which was be superior to theory discussion because it supposedly wouldn't.
To this I say that
1) I think the opposition is artificial, a town which somehow never reaches a lynch because of theory discussion is a fiction I don't envisage ever happening
2) if a lynch was reached in true random stage, it would be pretty worthless - this is why I said that people are to be held responsible of their votes.

We are out of the random stage now. I think we can all drop the theory discussion and start stating who we think is scummy and why.

I don't like this line. I think it sounds so put upon, and I don't see why. The 'theory discussion' such it has been has not lasted more than 1 page, so why do you sound so weary?

And I differ on the assessment of q21 's post. I don't think it is extraordinarily scummy, but I don't think it as pro-town as you make it out to be.

[springlullaby]

What started as a theory discussion has turned into a heated argument. I don't like the feeling I'm getting from all of this. I think scum lurking at the moment, trying to get us to kill each other off.

I don't like this line at all. It may be true naiveté but it sounds more like contrived ingenuity to me.

1. I don't actually think the argument present are anywhere near heated yet.

2. I don't think heated arguments are bad within limits.

3. So, who would you categorize as town/scum based on what you are saying here?

Sorry, but I agree with springlullaby for now.

Unvote, vote q21

I don't get it, why do you need to be apologetic while agreeing with me?

Anything you find particularly worthy of agreement?

[springlullaby]

1) Good for you
2) Explain why you think this.
3) See bolded portion.

1. Yes, thank you. Beside that, what do you find particularly 'heated'?

2. Explain what? I pretty much think heated arguments is the point of the game, and when it doesn't happen there is something really wrong. What is your conception of the game?

3. You don't understand, I want names. What you said was tantamount to nothing.

[springlullaby]

1. What does that mean? Do you think that Claus is wrong for making 'heated' post? Do you think it is an indication of scumminess/towniness?

2. And how do you expect "Psychology and Persuasion" to translate in reality into a game? Wait don't answer, I'm dropping this point altogether. I see this one going into pointless territory really fast.

3. This is evasive and beside the point, you said you think "scum are lurking at the moment":

What started as a theory discussion has turned into a heated argument. I don't like the feeling I'm getting from all of this. I think scum lurking at the moment, trying to get us to kill each other off.

I want names. Who do you think is lurking scum? What is the point in you posting what you posted if you don't point finger afterwards? If you think scum are lurking, do I take it to mean that you think everyone who has posted is town? Or something?

[springlullaby]

Above addressed at AceMarksman

[springlullaby]

Are you serious? What wild goose chase?

Yes, I have a point: I find your post 66 to be scummy because I think it is fake naiveté.

I ask you precise questions: you state that you think scum are lurking - I said that I want you to name names, because if you are not going to cast suspicion on somebody in particular, then your post 66 is totally useless, and it would be scummy for that reason.

What don't you understand there?

Let me repeat, who do you think is 'lurking scum'?

Unvote, vote AceMarkman

[springlullaby]

Were did I say that he wasn't scumhunting?

Here:

when you say 'more scumhunting please' what exactly do you have in mind? I think your call here is entirely empty.

Well, if Nuwen had not engaged that conversation, q21 would have had nothing to comment on: fact is scumhunting doesn't arise from nothing.

Now, you say that my vote is a disagreement vote - what would you call q21's vote then?

RSV will eventually lead to a lynch. Which doesn't mean that the lynch will be random. Bandwagon, counter bandwagon, counter counter bandwagon. Much better than theory discussion.

---

That is not the problem of Theory discussion. Scum can post "pro-town" things honestly without hurting their game with theory discussion. Also, theory discussion will delay a lynch and demotivate the town. Because of that, it is sub-optimal. I've seen both happen quite often enough.

Random votes don't lead to lynches of any value (see Killing Verses Mafia and fail town D1 with a random lynch to convince you of that), pushing through the random phase does. I maintain that the phantom menace of 'nothing but theory discussion' is a fantasy that isn't likely to happen, unless there is something really wrong with the town.

I'm adding to that that if you suspect someone of offering nothing but noise theories, than the best strategy for town is not to nip the suspicious behaviour in the bud, but to let it develop for a certain time and see.

... Yeah, actually I was weary.

Because of a game I've been very recently lynched on. Can't really comment on it as it is ongoing, but if you read it I think you'll understand my rage.

Not to appears unsympathetic or overly paranoid, but link please?

Still you vote him. How strong is your vote?

I would say that q21 is mildly scummy. His vote look vaguely pro townish for the displayed desire to move things along (in much the same manner as Nuwen actually), but objectively it accomplished very little, and doesn't constitute a strong scumhunting vote. I would also say scummy on a gut level because I can cite a game in which I made a vote very similar to his as scum, whereas on the other hand I made moves similar to Nuwen's as town.

But right now I think Ace is scummier.

[springlullaby]

Eh, I can't really defend myself from people's gut

(well, there's weight loss pills)

. Does anyone have a formal case against me that I can respond to (did I miss one? I'm very liable to do that atm)?

What don't you understand in my posts?

[springlullaby]

spring, I don't think you understand my position. I meant that if we carry on with this argument amongst ourselvs, then scum will start to lurk and let us kill each other. I'm starting to notice patterns of lurking from q21 and hp, so they are at the top of my suspect list at the moment. I would say q21 is more scummy than hp, because q21 started this entire argument in the first place. So,

Unvote, vote:q21

I'm trying to evaluate how likely it is for this to be awkwardness/newbishness because, well, I kinda expect scum to be better than that.

But bottom line is, it's one hell of a scumslip. So yeah, my vote is probably sticking, short of scum claiming scum.

[springlullaby]

I'm starting to get pretty far behind in this game and won't have much time for the foreseeable future. As much as I hate to do this its probably for the better if I'm replaced.

Mod, please replace me

Replaced by populartajo. - Incog-Mod.

For serious? This kinda make me want to revote q21 because it looks like scum panic. 5 pages, there is litterally nothing to catch up on!

My vote stays on Ace for now: the scumslip is the fact that he seems to be considering me to be town whereas he can't know were he town. Plus I don't understand what he doesn't understand in my asking him to name names in whom he thinks is scum, and whom he thinks is town.

[springlullaby]

Q21 is replacing out of games en masse. Framing his replacement request as panic or a tactical withdrawal is suspect - I think a town player would have made the effort to click his recent posts to confirm that Q21 is replacing out of this game exclusively. Rather than eliminate all possibilities, however, Spring latched on to the most convenient scummy explanation.

Lol, no. There was nothing in what q21 said that made me suspect he replaced out of more than 1 game, so I didn't even think of verifying. However, I didn't bother voting him either because if replacing out tend to make people look scummy, it is generally a crapshoot call at best.

Nuwen, a couple of questions:
1. What do you think is contrived in what I have posted so far?
You have criticised my Ace vote, and my Ace vote only (whereas you have implied plural in 'contrived cases"). But from what you are saying you seem to disagree on me on 'gut read' - this doesn't tie in with you saying that my case is contrived.

2.How familiar are you with ABR's meta and what do you think of Ace's vote and FOS on ABR and Claus?
My thoughts on it is that it is very cliché and easy. I don't see Claus/ABR interraction as coaching, more as two people familiar with each others meta - which is a nulltell at best.

Fixed a quote tag. - Incog-Mod.

[springlullaby]

Sorry mod, broken tags again :c

[springlullaby]

Not to appears unsympathetic or overly paranoid, but link please?

You're a big girl, you could just follow my profile, no? I'm not in that many games.

This is irregular. Why make me do the work if you can alleviate my suspicions in a matter of seconds? I don't get the motivation there.

-----------

I don't find Lawrencelot to be as scummy as people makes it appear. I don't see scum doing such a blatant flip flop that early in the day, that would be terrible maladroitness.

I think the slip is there. I also don't see the motive behind Ace being suspicious of Claus since according to him "scum is lurking". I'm calling bullshit on the whole business and chalking it up to scum having nothing to say.

[springlullaby]

Not to appears unsympathetic or overly paranoid, but link please?

You're a big girl, you could just follow my profile, no? I'm not in that many games.

This is irregular. Why make me do the work if you can alleviate my suspicions in a matter of seconds? I don't get the motivation there.

-----------

I don't find Lawrencelot to be as scummy as people makes it appear. I don't see scum doing such a blatant flip flop that early in the day, that would be terrible maladroitness.

I think the slip is there. I also don't see the motive behind Ace being suspicious of Claus since according to him "scum is lurking". I'm calling bullshit on the whole business and chalking it up to scum having nothing to say.

[springlullaby]

If you were really interested in knowing whether I was lying or telling the truth, you could very easily have done the fact checking yourself after my last post.

The fact that you didn't tells me that you're not really interested in the answer to the question you made.

First, I don't meta people if I can help it because I think it's tedious and boring. Second, you made a vague claim that one lynch caused you to be weary, am I supposed to go through all your games and guess which fits the bill?

I still don't see the point of you refusing to provide the link and I think your reaction here is kinda awkward. You brush off something I found slightly bizarre in your play by invoking some vague emotional context; I ask a link from you to see whether I'm going to dismiss my point, and you turn my asking into something seemingly scummy.

...Why?

[springlullaby]

I think the slip is there. I also don't see the motive behind Ace being suspicious of Claus since according to him "scum is lurking". I'm calling bullshit on the whole business and chalking it up to scum having nothing to say.

No. Bad spring, no cookie for you. I like how you completely misinterpreted what I said. I said that I thought scum would lurk

while we were arguing over theory

. I found claus scummy (in connection to ABR) for a separate reason.

Actually, point taken, both argument do seem seperate. Nonetheless, I criticized your vote on ABR and Claus in one of my post to Nuwen, and I feel your lack of comment strange.

I don't see scum doing such a blatant flip flop that early in the day, that would be terrible maladroitness.

Yet you're voting me because, to you, I flipped on my position of lurking scum.

[/quote]
No, my argument there was that I caught you in blatant contradiction, which you are right, is not actually the case. However I have other problems with your play.

Now I'm voting you because
a) Pointless line such as 'the scum is lurking', yet when asked to name lurking scum make the discussion devolves into a sort of avoidance game.
b) Slip with the talking to me as if I was confirmed town.
c) Cliché and weak vote fos on ABR/Claus.

[springlullaby]

- The "slip" portion of your case against Ace combined with the almost simultaneous callout on q21's replacement - both seem like long reaches at scum tells. As I pointed out, Ace's post makes a great deal of sense in context and Q21's replacement is pretty null if he's doing so in other games. Calling either one scummy behavior sounds like you're trying to fit tells to behavior, rather than gauge behavior against tells.

I'm okay with that answer.
1. I've addressed my calling out q1 replacement already.
2. I don't see Ace's play the way you do. I think his first couple of replies to my asking him to name names was very defensive (refusal to give straight answers, apparent incomprehension) but yet his tone abruptly change to appeasing. Imo this kind of change fits the 'confirmed town slip' pattern, whereas implied shared alignment is used to appease attackers.

Mafia is a game, yeah? "Game theory" isn't something I dreamed up during a long trip, yeah? Mafia combines the best elements of logic, game theory, psychological reading, and behavioral analysis - trying to preclude one component in favor of others discredits the whole of Mafia. My point here is that you're strawmanning a bit - "mob mentality" is not a reason to dismiss one component of the game, and it especially isn't a reason to call any use of that component scummy when employed. It's the town's responsibility to make sure that it doesn't get lead into illogical voting traps - calling my statement dangerous or subversive because it has the potential to devolve into "mob mentality" upon misinterpretation is pretty silly. Anything anyone says is potentially detrimental if interpreted and acted on in an anti-town manner.

I think Claus' 'mob mentality' argument is streching a bit but I also find the above to be a mound of useless words. I don't see the point. Actually, what's your point?

I still support an HP lynch. Not requesting a replacement (or at least pursuing the possibility of a temporary hydra) during a week long V/LA -> most anti-town thing all game. By far.

I think your vote here is terribly weak, it is a policy lynch, and policy lynch are lame, always because there are never better than 1/2 odds. You are also calling policy lynch on a person whose contribution I haven't found very scummy so far.

[springlullaby]

Also there is something that doesnt feel right. Nuwen and spring both are very agressive against everyone else except against each other.

Am I the only one noticing this?

I find this strange because I have yet to be aggressive toward anyone in this game.

[springlullaby]

Here's what I think happened here. First, I think law and ABR are scum together. Second, to avoid them getting lynched, ABR put together a "do not lynch" list including the two scum and two townies. Third, there isn't a third.

Thoughts on this?

I think it makes you look like scum. My vote stays.

_____________

1. I'm not going to vote ABR for the remaining of the game because I've decided that he is town.

2. I think nuwen is 50/50 and needs more observation. On one hand the theory positions she has taken are pretty much pointless garbage imo - I don't get her point about universal scumtell and such at all (this is scummy because 'refuge in complexity' or the appearance thereof is common scum manoeuvre), and her vote is pretty weak when you consider all the words she has typed. On the other hand, sometimes when I want to get a game going I take random positions and argue them for england just to make something happen. I want to see more before deciding if I want to press or not.

3. @Claus: I did not misrepresent you, I asked you *why* you sounded weary because I judged that less than one page of 'theory' was hardly lethal offence. But it's ok if you say that you didn't expect the Inquisition on this point.

Now a question for you, you have repeated that you were HOS'ing me twice, but I see no effort on your part to pressure me. So, what exactly is your HoS useful for?

4. @Poptajo: I don't understand your vote. Is there anything else to it beside OMGUS? Do you think ABR is scum? Why? Your vote looks like scum vote and totally got owned by ABR there.

5. Someone asked my position on law, I made them clear already in my last post. I think the flip flop is strange, but I don't think he is as scummy as people makes him appear. I have him at neutral.

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

I believe that the best way to start this game off is to lynch the players who were likely veto'd by the mafia, to keep our secret lynchee alive.

Huge FoS:ABR

You want us to lynch the strongest players here? I don't think so. Strongly considering you to be scum with law, as I don't think law would have been veto'd.

This reeks so much of fake town concern and is a wholly crappy excuse for a FoS.

1. Strong players are only good to keep around if they are town. How do you know that the 'strong players' here are town?
2. Were I to assume that you are town, the 'damsel in distress' subtext here would be abhorrent. Losing strong player is bad only if the rest of town sucks.

No town actually thinks like that. Strong players are generally held under much more scrutiny because they are harder to catch as scum.

Please, can we lynch this guy already?

_________________

Since we are near deadline, my lynch wish list:
- Ace
- Poptajo
Both are high potential scum.
- hp leaves, to meet deadline if necessary and I do agree their participation after VLA sucks.

[springlullaby]

I wonder if spring would vote or would not vote someone that a)ask for her lynch for no reason at all (and push it hard for weak reasons) and b)ask her to vote that person.

a)This is a misrepresentation, ABR gave reasons, to which you failed to respond intelligently and in an articulate and correct manner. I will expound on this momentarily.

b)Whether someone ask you to vote them is relevant only insofar whether the request is scummy. I find that what ABR has said is un-scummy. I will add here that the post in which says 'vote me' is a follow up to a particularly inane post by you in which you threaten him with your vote. Tell me, what kind of answer did you expect exactly? From scumABR? From townABR? From anyone actually? Are you surprised at all? And then tell me, what exactly is scummy in ABR telling you to vote him in these circumstances?

To answer your question, in your place I would have:
a) If I thought that he was misguided town: defended against ABR by demonstrating the flaws in his case, and looked elsewhere for scum.
b) If I thought that he was scum: demonstrated why I think he was scum and pushed for his lynch.

The kid thought I wouldnt vote him. Guess he was wrong. I dont think he is obv scum but if he doesnt start making sense then Im so going to push for his death.

This is extremely scummy. If you don't think someone is scum, you don't vote them barring extreme situations (deadline, deadlock etc). Period.
Possible explanations I see to what you are saying are as follow:
- You are scum caught off guard by ABR and are now struggling to find an explanation for your beyond weak vote, and are trying for the 'headstrong town' gimmick.
- You are presumptuous town who think that telling people how they should play and pressuring them to do so is more important than identifying town from scum.

Were you the later, you would have no sympathy from me and would have to work hard to regain any credibility with me. But right now I think that the former is much more likely because 1)the kind of presumptuousness I just described is generally a characteristic of poweroles, and we know that there are no blues in this game 2) my perception of your level of experience makes me think that you taking such a crappy position as town is unlikely.

In any case, you will

not

have a free pass to cast lukewarm, seemingly half policy, half ad-hominem motivated votes from me.

Now, impress me. Why do you think ABR is town?

Firstly, if it is your prerogative to ask for explanations, and my liberty to give them, I in no way have to 'impress' you. The implied subordination here is disagreeable to me and is possibly manipulative ('bully bias' wherein people tends to side with whomever talks bigger/is meaner); I'll ask you to watch it if you don't want things to turn nasty because I'm just enough of a jerk to respond to condescension in kind. The fact that I think you are scum right now will only make maliciousness all the more easy. I'm not asking for politeness, just the minimum of neutrality. You've been given fair warning.

Now, on why I think ABR isn't scum: town has a particular way of proposing wobbly logic that is exceptionally hard to imitate as scum. Here I could indeed put on an impressive paragraph on how imo the phenomenon is generally the by product of townie intuitions that aren't always easy to rationalize and a natural human tendency to laziness in doing so, but the bottom line on this is that any player with a modicum of experience known this. It is possible that scumABR is subtle enough to pull off this kind of townie stubbornness caricature, but not likely.

Plus, the logic he has proposed is not totally unfounded:
1) It is not a stretch to think that scum would have chosen to veto players whom are perceived as stronger/harder to lynch.
2) Out of the name he has proposed, I don't think his veto list is stretching though I have to say I haven't heard of q21 before.

The downside to this plan is that this kind of policy lynch is pretty much a coin flip affair, if it just happens that scum is in the 'probably not veto'd list', town would have very little to go on with. So I agree that this game should be played as a vanilla game. This is the most valable criticisms that could have been made against what ABR has proposed, and you failed short of highlighting it.

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

Now, you have indeed

not impressed

me with the explanation of your vote and I think the position you have taken to justify it is undefendable, and therefore scummy.

You say that ABR's vote is weak (and while I happen to agree to an extent), this is extremely hypocritical because your vote happens to be beyond weak.

[springlullaby]

I think you guys are all giving Poptajo too much credits for his little emotional spaz. Remember that anger is the easiest of the emotions to fake as scum because it pisses scum off to be caught. You have to examine the facts, and fact is Poptajo's vote on ABR sucks beyond measure.

I'm rescinding what I said about Law, I have them at lynchable now because his 250 is too appeasing and middle of the road for my taste.

I too am thinking that the hp leaves lynch is a very weak lynch, maybe we can strive for something better.

Let's do a lynch pledging list, update it with whom you are willing to lynch:

* Nuwen
* Lawrencelot (1): spring
* Albert B. Rampage
* Claus
* AceMarksman (1): spring
* populartajo (1): spring
* springlullaby
* ekiM
* hp [leaves] (1): spring

[springlullaby]

Because I wasn't there this weekend. Check your facts.

I still don't like you Ace and would like you to explain the following post.
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 68#1670368

Why did you say that Law was going to get lynched at that point in the game? It wasn't the case as the leading wagons at that points were HP leaves and Law and the rest of town was undecided.

I think it looks like scum lining up lynches.

Out of the people not on the law lynch, Nuwen is the scummiest because the only vote she pushed all day yesterday was weak vote on hp leaves.

[springlullaby]

I never said he was going to get lynched, I said ABR was trying to prevent him from being lynched. Check your facts. I said that because, well, that's what it looked like to me.

This looks like wriggling because I fail to see how you cannot understand my question.

When you said that ABR was trying to prevent Law from being lynched, it must have meant that you thought Law was going to get lynched at that point in time since, were it not the case, there wouldn't have been need to prevent it.

Only, at that point in time, Law was nowhere near being lynched. This is why I'm asking you this question, with a slight amendment as to not allow you any wiggle room or ground for misunderstanding: why did you think that ABR's action at the time of your post was to prevent Lawrencelot's lynch

specifically

since at that point in time hp[leaves] was in a competing wagon?

---

Populartajo, I have no 'conclusion about the Law lynch'. Examining the facts while taking Law's flip into consideration make me think that AceMarkman is most probably scum for the reason I have started to delineate in my last post and am expanding on now. I have noticed your refusal to address my points, and the only reason I am not pressing it against you is because I now think that you are ego town.

I will address your line of thinking here, mostly by doing mind reading mind you, because you never had the basic decency to explain it:

Everyone on the Lawrencelot wagon must be town because with 2 scum, bussing is unlikely.

My thoughts on the subject: I think that such a conclusion is hasty for a number of reasons.
1) Scum were allowed to talk before the game as they had to chose people to veto. I think this should make town expect a deeper level of strategy from scum.
2) Lawrencelot is in no mean a newbie, I don't think that he would have been afraid of bussing under the circumstances.
-->From this I conclude that if bussing has not necessarily taken place, it is nonetheless a possibility that is equally as likely as it not being the case and that the correct way to play this is to examine people's interraction with Law. While doing this, I have found Ace to be suspect.

Now please state why you think Ace is obvtown, because I see it not.

[springlullaby]

Vote Ace

I collected the Law/Ace interraction in a pbpa but can't put my hand on the file right now.

Anyway

->See Lawrencelot flipflop vote on Ace. My stand on this is that Law is too experienced to be so bad as to do that kind of flip flop as scum without a real motive. I think that what happened there was that he figured it wouldn't matter as he was voting his buddy, and thought that it would help his camp anyway if one of them flipped.
->It is also true that each time he voted/unvoted Ace was following a moment in which Ace was garnering attention/pressure was easing on Ace. This would be consistent with someone wanting to secure a good non-bus looking vote on a buddy, but not really wanting to push the case on them.
->See also the case Lawrencelot wrote on Ace, and compare it to his certainty of tone while voting Tajo later in the day.
->On Ace's side, see both time he drew a link between ABR and Law in an incongruous manner and without justification in the middle of the day whereas there was only 3 votes on Law. I think what happened there was that Ace got a bit panicky about Law getting lynched, and tried to set up a mislynch.

->There are also multiple individual scumtell on Ace's part, I still think what I wrote about him yesterday is true. Plus, the total lack of initiative today. Though it's true Tajo and Nuwen have been crappy at this as well.

Anyway my scumscale in order would be

SCUM
^
I AceMarksman: see above
I
I Nuwen: really crappy contribution
I
I hp leaves: I'm thinking stupid town, though
I
I populartajo: I'm thinking ego town, but possibly intelligent enough to fake it
I
I Albert B. Rampage: chance of being fake low, but who knows
I ekiM: good contrib so far, a little under the radar maybe
v
TOWN

[springlullaby]

Yeah, pretty sure I'm arguing with scum. If anyone beside Ace want me to answer, please ask, and I'll do.

Mod: a round of prod again please

[springlullaby]

I wish I could put my hand on my notes. Anyway. Poptajo, I can tell by the conclusion you have come to that you have done only a very sloppy job in analysing Ace and Law probably only viewing thier posts in isolation and without paying attention to the timing in which the posts you quote were made.

Everything I reply now is by memory, not to allow myself room for imprecisions, but to highlight the attention of analysis I have put in this and which you obviously didn't.

Spring and ABR, Ace is probtown. Look at these quotes and tell me what do you think:

but for example Ace and ABR just joined my wagon without good reasoning.

I was the first one on your wagon

This doesnt look like bussing at all.

1. What Law is saying there is not even true. Ace did not join the Law wagon at this point.
2. What doesn't look like bussing at all? Explain it and I may take your opinion into consideration.
3. I think Law mention of Ace's name here is at best a nulltell, but has very high chance of being a scumtell: putting 1 townie/1 scum in a last distancing move would not go against bussing logic. And before anyone stupid pester me with 'how do you know it's 1 townie/1 scum': I don't know but I'm working on a bussing hypothesis.

Don't lynch me, I have the most powerful protown role of the game

Ha! Scumslip. There are no power roles besides the chosen one and the chosen one does not know that they are the Chosen one, as cleared up by incog in the first posts of the game:

To clarify since I've gotten this question a bit: The Chosen One will

not

know that he or she is the Chosen One. His or her role will be revealed upon death though.

Therefore you would not know if you were or were not the chosen one. A townie would have no reason to claim this, however the mafia would have every reason to claim this hoping the rest of the town would forget about incog's clarification above. Sorry law, you made it too easy.

This is a terrible bus if Ace were scum. If he were scum he wouldnt push a weak case against his scumpartner.

1. This is not the case Ace used to justify his vote.
2. I consider the above quote as incriminating evidence:
a)Ace made this scumslip accusation AFTER Law had been hammered, making his post totally redundant
b) As you have remarked, the accusation is totally inane, it was obvious to me that Lawrencelot's 'most protown power' comment was tongue in cheek as evidenced by the smilie accompanying it.
-->This leads me to the conclusion that Ace's post was so exaggeratedly stupid and cartoony (with onomatopoeia and exclamation mark) because it most probably a crappy attempt at securing a bus face to a buddy's imminent flip.
3. I do believe that Ace is still wet behind the ears enough at this game to be capable of so obvious fail.

Here's what I think happened here. First, I think law and ABR are scum together. Second, to avoid them getting lynched, ABR put together a "do not lynch" list including the two scum and two townies. Third, there isn't a third.
Thoughts on this?

This is what ABR has called as setting up mislynches. I disagree. This is some decent speculation since it passed through my mind at some point. Again, the possibilities of bussing this hard when there are only two scum are lower.

1. Have you taken a look at the timing of the allegation, at all? Have you noticed that Ace tried to link ABR and Law twice on the ground that ABR was trying to prevent Law's lynch, at a time where Law

was nowhere near being lynched

? How do you explain that? At what time that 'decent speculation' has crossed your mind.
2. As for your 'since it passed through my mind at some point' I believe that one of the following is true:
a) Consistent with what I perceive as a full of ego and OMGUSy personality, it is possible that you have contemplated every possibility for ABR being scum during your campaign against him just so you could feel righteous about your case, and this to the disregard of plausibility.
b) You are lying now to have something to say, and this possibly as town because you are that pointless. (I hope the latter is true and my prediction is eating at your brain and making you fume even though I do not expect you to ever own up to it)
-->In any case, in no venue Ace's quote can be justified as 'decent speculation' because it simply isn't - even if it came from town it would be baseless and pointless: if you ever tried to lynch someone with a speculation like that, you'd be lynch worthy.

I've got some computer access today (yey!) and reading through, I found this little scummy nugget:

Unvote, might switch back to Ace later.

Note, this is (another) point where my wagon is cooling off but law still gives excuse to jump right back on it when it picks up again.

More hard attacking.

And nothing strike you as strange in what Ace is saying there? You have obviously not verified Ace's sayings because, as ekim has pointed out earlier, Ace's comment there is strange because Law's vote was the only one beside mine, and Law's unvote was single handedly responsible of the 'cooling of the wagon'.

I'm starting to think law is scummier than ABluRker at the moment. I would make a case, but I'm stressed out because of AP exams. Expect one soon. However:

Unvote, Vote: law

And more.

@ law leaning scum: he jumped on my bandwagon here based on gut right at the moment my wagon is picking up steam. He then unvotes me (when my wagon is cooling off), promising a case (which has not come yet), and the re-votes me once my bandwagon picks up steam again. He hasn't made much of a case against me. He's being really opportunistic.

And more.

This is Law

Since these are my highest suspects at the moment, I'll Vote: AceMarksman. Mostly gut, but I don't have much more this early in D1.

What kind of scum votes his scumpartner that early?

I'm still not that sure about q21. I'll wait for his replacement to catch up and then reconsider. But for now, Vote: AceMarksman.

What kind of scum revotes his scumpartner that early?

Post 130 is a big post against Ace. Again, this is some serious attacks against Ace, kinda an easy target at the middle of day 1.

Good lynches:
hp

Not bad lynches:
Ace, ABR (if you don't take chosen stuff into account)

Worse lynches:
populartajo, no lynch?

Bad lynches:
rest

I would bet money that the remaining scum is in the rest group.

[/quote]

Ok, your quoting is pointless because you have not taken into account what I said into consideration. I think you have not even read my case against Ace, many which points address the posts you quote. I'm not repeating myself.

_____________________________________________

My position is the following: I think Ace is scum and want his lynch.

I think Nuwen is second suspect, on account of lame participation yesterday + today lameless + contradiction in her willingness to lynch hp because of 'not asking for replacement' and her being non contributive and not asking replacement herself.

I think hp leaves is probably just bad at this.

-----> I'm open to lynch either Ace, or Nuwen if no one is willing to follow on Ace today.

Make this quick, my posting will be very erractic starting June.

[springlullaby]

Yeah, pretty sure I'm arguing with scum. If anyone beside Ace want me to answer, please ask, and I'll do.

I don't think that you should need anyone else to tell you to respond, thank you.

Nice misrep. I telling everyone that I'm not responding to you because I think you are scum.

If anyone want me to respond I can.

Try again.

[springlullaby]

Okay Nuwen, answer to this:

- Why are you asking for replacement now?
- Do you agree that if you are scum, you asking for replacement now is the cheapest play possible because it would be avoiding responsibility for you bad play and dumping an uncomfortable position into someone else's lap?

[springlullaby]

I'm for leaving the Nuwen spot alone as I do not think Nuwen is so lame as to replace out just to avoid being caught as scum. If she was indeed scum I have no problem with throwing the win to her, and hope she enjoys it, hollowly.

Yo! Reading. Will post later.

Really waiting for this.

Way to put pressure on me, dude. Everyone in this game is scummy.

One thing I've really picked up on that I find odd is that there are two people in this game that I'm in another game with, and they both seem to be behaving a tad differently in this game than in the other. In Spring's case, I find it interesting that she's not being game-killingly oobnoxious here.

1. This may come as a surprise to people of little imagination but I'm actually playing a game, and the personae I may wish to assume in one or the other are as ephemeral and diverse as I wish them to be.
2. Here, no one has yet proven to be as astonishingly unintelligent and vapid as you, amongst others (not to mention your game-killing lurking), have been in that other game of which you make mention. I hope you leave the fail out of the door this time, it's never too late to improve.
3. I hope you were affronted by the above, it was destined to be slightly mean, as no doubt your post to my attention was. Please consider my jive here a fair retribution for your out of line and pointless reference about

another ongoing game

as well as the expression of a sincere wish to leave the matter at that.

[springlullaby]

Alright I will ask for

MOD: arbitrage now, please

because I object to the insult and the nebulous vote that seems to be motivated by nothing else than some sort of vendetta.

DizzyIzzy, what is your vote supposed to mean? Is it mafia motivated at all? Or strictly personal dislike?

If it is the latter, I will ask you to go make a thread about it in GD or something and leave it out of the game because your action is puerile.

[springlullaby]

Alright I will ask for

MOD: arbitrage now, please

because I object to the insult and the nebulous vote that seems to be motivated by nothing else than some sort of vendetta.

DizzyIzzy, what is your vote supposed to mean? Is it mafia motivated at all? Or strictly personal dislike?

If it is the latter, I will ask you to go make a thread about it in GD or something and leave it out of the game because your action is puerile.

This.

Even though, spring you cant really complain when you have treated people like stupid town and some other insults in this very game.

Dont treat others as you dont want to be treated, they say.

1. Calling on people's stupidity is not an insult within game argument. If I wish to present arguments demonstrating how someone's reasoning is stupid, it is up to you to present your argument to prove otherwise if you disagree.
2. You are in no position to tell me not to "treat others as you dont want to be treated" given that you have repeatedly called people 'retarded' in this very game.

Why should I not complain? At no time did I cross the frontier to personal insults in neither game, and I am certainly not bringing vendetta in my play, about another

ongoing game

no less.

This whole thing is absolutely tedious and puerile and it needs to stop now.