Newbie 785 - Game Over

[PhilyEc]

Also, I have to question how the point in time I replace someone can possibly be viewed as a negative?

Scum lurk Day One alot. I do when I'm scum thats for sure ^o^

[Papa Zito]

Also, I have to question how the point in time I replace someone can possibly be viewed as a negative?

Scum lurk Day One alot. I do when I'm scum thats for sure ^o^

But surely you see the difference between flaking and lurking? Or am I missing something here?

[PhilyEc]

Also, I have to question how the point in time I replace someone can possibly be viewed as a negative?

Scum lurk Day One alot. I do when I'm scum thats for sure ^o^

But surely you see the difference between flaking and lurking? Or am I missing something here?

Only problem is town cant determine if someones lurking or flaking unless they post in other games. Since this is a newbie game that can't be cross checked so again no help looking there either =/

[Papa Zito]

Also, I have to question how the point in time I replace someone can possibly be viewed as a negative?

Scum lurk Day One alot. I do when I'm scum thats for sure ^o^

But surely you see the difference between flaking and lurking? Or am I missing something here?

Only problem is town cant determine if someones lurking or flaking unless they post in other games. Since this is a newbie game that can't be cross checked so again no help looking there either =/

You can tell the difference because he didn't pick up his prod and got replaced. If he'd been lurking then he would have picked up his prod and continued to not post.

[PhilyEc]

Only problem is town cant determine if someones lurking or flaking unless they post in other games. Since this is a newbie game that can't be cross checked so again no help looking there either =/

You can tell the difference because he didn't pick up his prod and got replaced. If he'd been lurking then he would have picked up his prod and continued to not post.

Good point. His posts contain intelligence and you can see hes got logic too. I'd say hes had internet problems or something in life came up rather than just deciding to abandon the game willingly . Considering he'd made a positive step towards scumhunting he never really commented on anything significant. That leaves me with a slight town read on you now.

[Cyren]

@ zito - I don't think anyone really likes RVS its just one of those necessary evils when there isn't any info for most characters.

That aside, Shotty's post.

I have a problem with parts of this as well. The, "I've been paying more attention to the way people play/post then attacking specific people." Sounds exactly like Gadgets, "I sit back and watch people's reaction" post. I don't think a scum pair would come out and say basically the same thing, but you're both proclaiming something pretty anit-town.

Making a "case" against a lurker doesn't really help town either. Mentioning the fact they aren't posting is fine, but how can you really build a case against someone who doesn't post at all? "Active lurking" is apparenlty something different.

THe main problem I have with your post Shotty is that you say, "don't quick lynch" and then you say, "The longer the day is the more inconsistencies there will be to see from scum in my opinion"... WTH? Short day = quick lynch + no information. Even if they're inconsistencies I'd rather have a lot of those than absolutley nothing to go off of. We'd also have to be lynching someone based off of little to nothing which is a scummy thing to do.

Also I want to say that two replaces still on D1 isn't that bad, especially since Zito and I are posting unlike the people before us.

all in all I agree mostly with Zito's post as well.

@ Phily

When I see a questioning post, I quote it, and in preview cut off the pieces not addressed to me. I didnt see what you said about Gadget but ill read now. I guess giving him particular attention during a re-read would make it biased though so nvm.

I would suggest always reading everything even when it isn't addressed to you.

It is posible for the pair of the newcomers to be both scum, as they can hide behind a big PBPA of everyone to claim they are town, Cyren, However is playing her posts more than Papa, in my opinion.

*raises eyebrow* I would not ever hide behind a PBPA to claim town. That doesn't even make sense to me. I WILL however, say that I AM reading, responding to, and questioning everyone here. "Playing" my posts? I'm not sure what that means. But that quote smells a little OMGUSy to me considering Zito and I are playing similar I'm just voting you and he's voting Shotty.

Okay, first you post,

Phily wouldnt make himself such an obvious target if he was one[scum], he also seems to know what he is doing, he is trustable, for the time being.

THEN

Besides, I also never said that phily was town, I still have my residual suspicions of him, and there is still a chance I may vote for him.

How is he trustable and not town? Also how is he trustable just because "he seems to know what he is doing"?

Also, Regards to Your Reply Cy. What I mean is he is throwing out the suggestion that we leave him alone, if we took that, we could be making one right move, or one wrong move, same goes for the other way, His pleas to be left alone were scummy sounding, yet there was a posibility he was down to begging for his freedom, lynching could yeild a scum result, given his overaggressiveness and his desperation, or

he could be someone who just wants to say, to be honest

, I suspect him of the former, sorry.

So what you're saying is, we attacked him, he said stop, he could be scum, he might not be? Ummm, DUH. That is how the game works, if we backed off of everyone who simply said, "I'm town don't lynch me" we'd never finish a game. What

exactly

makes you think he is a townie instead of scum?

And, oh look, there it is again! I repeat, how can he be honest/trustworthy AND not be town?

You're being highly contradicting and confusing. I look forward to the rest of your post.

Also Philly please don't respond to any of this at least not till after Gadget responds if you want. Its not questioning you but Gadget's thought process.

----- I have to be quick and sum up the rest of this, sorry------

(which doesn't make sense to me, btw, because by making those posts we're both sticking our necks out) you instead analyze what we said and see if any of it strikes you funny.

What he said, don't just attack our PBPA's... READ THEM, analyze them yourselves instead of just saying "thats scummy". What about our PBPA's are scummy?

90% of people who replace do PBPA's... I wouldn't know how to post as a replacement without doing so. My thoughts on the game so far ARE whats needed right? Hence, pbpa.


@Qwints - we're all still waiting to see some in depth posting from our IC.

Sorry guys but

I'll be gone for the weekend

[GadgetArcrep]

Regard to playing posts, I said that you thought trough and anylised with your posting more than Zito, and it was a compliment.

Also Philly please don't respond to any of this at least not till after Gadget responds if you want. Its not questioning you but Gadget's thought process.

To me, that would be considered baiting someone, You're baiting me to react in a way that you can convince Phily that I am scum, and from the bat you have been considering me the main suspect and pushing for a lynch.

I would suggest always reading everything even when it isn't addressed to you.

Which is exactly what you did then to see wether or not i was paying attention, because ignoring posts, in your opinion, is one of my attributes.

That is how the game works, if we backed off of everyone who simply said, "I'm town don't lynch me" we'd never finish a game. What exactly makes you think he is a townie instead of scum?

Again, I still consider Phily as one of my suspects, just not my main suspect at the moment. To be honest, You are starting to be one of my suspects, this is not OMGUSing, but my suspicions are based on your persistance to put me away, with pretty much most if not all your your game relevant posts are a direct attack to me, or includes one, to try and steer conversation towards being about me.

You're being highly contradicting and confusing.

I cant meta on that fact, and even if I could I wouldnt. But I would like to point out that it is my nature when writing anything, my mother knows it, my english teacher has lectured me on it (but more of said lecture is sexual innuendo and tangental to the actual topic, trust me, he says irrelevant stuff more often than relevant stuff). etc etc.

[Papa Zito]

I'm not going to interject into the Gadget/Cyren conversation here since Cyren doesn't need my help, but I am going to say that the above solidifies Gadget as my #2.

All - keep in mind that we have a deadline a week from today, so we'll need to start moving to a consensus soon. At this point I'm fine with either a Shotty or Gadget lynch.

[Giskard]

Vote: falkomagno

I gave him plenty of time to respond to the things I said in post 187 and he has completely ignored it. I am now convinced that he is scum and was trying to start a bandwagon against quints and has been lurking once he realized that wasn't working.

[falkomagno]

...Here is a PBPA of falko's activity:


20. The much debated "just advice me when the RVS stops, and the serious voting start" post
37.

ok...let put some pressure right now...since it's early and there is not real reasons to put in danger anybody...but, the explanation of qwints doesn't be enought...

unvote, Fos qwints

This post is essentially the same as the ones that the case against Shotty is being built upon.

but at that time, That was a legitimate question.

51. Responds to some questions and votes for quints for vague reasons. This was (at the time) the third vote for quints and I seem to recall reading somewhere that the third person on a bandwagon is likely mafia.

So, be third in a votation is scum. ....I can't see a weakest reason to suspect in anybody...

64. Responds to questions regarding post 20. Clarifies that he voted because quints is "creating confusion" although I did not find anything confusing about quints accusations.

So, if I ask if X post is serious, and you say yes, just to recognize a couple of post after that you weren't serious, is clear as water. Sorry, but to me it just create confusion.

93.

yeah...I saw meta...metagame and others like that, and I'm curious.

Talking about the game. I think that we have to clarify who are lurking and who is away for legitimate reasons

Not much of value in this post.

I was asking something, it's that wrong?. there is a lot of vocabulary and abbreviations used in mafia games, and if new players like me question about it, isn't matter of value or not in the post, but to clarify issues. That's was worth for me, and maybe for another new player who would have the same doubt.

125.

What do you mean lack of activity...I'm been as active as I can, and I've done at least 2 post in any page...

but, to be honest, right now I can not suspect strongly about noone, I think that, if somebody ahs noticed some argument fissure, we can go deeper in that way. I didn't see anythig so suspicious lately

Another post with no real content.

that's what I thought in that moment. If I didn't suspect anybody, why not to share that opinion??

Responding post 56.

It's true that I was involved in the RVS, when I vote for The Corporation. Then, qwert vote for me because an unclear reason about OMGUS. So, I ask for a call when the serious vote stage starts, so, we can differentiate true arguments and fake or joke arguments. When qwert says that he was serious, well, How do you understand that?.

And That leads me to Responding post 52

I think that the responses given by qwerts are just creating confusion, and that only serves to scumm. Why do you say that you are serious, as a joke??. It's like voting for himself. Then, he makes weak assumptions, as said that I'm going to stop posting until the real stages starts, when I just ask WHEN starts. I'm not aganist RVS, since that can be fun and stuff, I'm against obscure argumentation, and attemp of create confussion

The only posts that he made that have any real content are 51 and 64. Both or these posts give what seem to me has terrible reasons for putting quints at L-2 and that has me very suspicious of falko.

I think that post 64 clarify my position about that. Simply say that "is a terrible reason" did'nt make any sense if you don't say why. You just can quote and say...that's terrible, that's null, that's worthless, that doesn't have nay value, because you have to argumentate and say why in first place.

If you have real question, and not just " I think that 's terrible reasons" I'm glad to answer you.


I take a time to respond you because I hardly see that post (187) as a question straight directed at me I just saw a person who quotes my post and says, "that worthless" without any position instead, neither analisys supporting that statements.

[PhilyEc]

I'm not going to interject into the Gadget/Cyren conversation here since Cyren doesn't need my help, but I am going to say that the above solidifies Gadget as my #2.

I dont think it was that concrete a result. Thats a bit of a stretch Zito.

[Papa Zito]

I dont think it was that concrete a result. Thats a bit of a stretch Zito.

No? Hmm. I'll explain then. Sorry Cyren, wasn't trying to interfere.

Also Philly please don't respond to any of this at least not till after Gadget responds if you want. Its not questioning you but Gadget's thought process.

To me, that would be considered baiting someone, You're baiting me to react in a way that you can convince Phily that I am scum, and from the bat you have been considering me the main suspect and pushing for a lynch.

There's no baiting here. Cyren's basically saying "I'm scumhunting, please don't answer for him so he can wriggle away." Second point - I haven't seen Cyren push for a lynch yet.

I would suggest always reading everything even when it isn't addressed to you.

Which is exactly what you did then to see wether or not i was paying attention, because ignoring posts, in your opinion, is one of my attributes.

This doesn't even make sense. Cyren's just saying to pay attention to other conversations, even if you aren't involved in them. Your post is a blatant misrepresentation. Also, you

have

been ignoring posts. You ignored my post 197 for one.

That is how the game works, if we backed off of everyone who simply said, "I'm town don't lynch me" we'd never finish a game. What exactly makes you think he is a townie instead of scum?

Again, I still consider Phily as one of my suspects, just not my main suspect at the moment. To be honest, You are starting to be one of my suspects, this is not OMGUSing, but my suspicions are based on your persistance to put me away, with pretty much most if not all your your game relevant posts are a direct attack to me, or includes one, to try and steer conversation towards being about me.

Yes, she's scumhunting you. If Phily is one of your suspects then why aren't you scumhunting him?

You're being highly contradicting and confusing.

I cant meta on that fact, and even if I could I wouldnt. But I would like to point out that it is my nature when writing anything, my mother knows it, my english teacher has lectured me on it (but more of said lecture is sexual innuendo and tangental to the actual topic, trust me, he says irrelevant stuff more often than relevant stuff). etc etc.

I don't even know where to go with this.

[PhilyEc]

Last part is just him repeating what hes accused of but this seems to be a failing in logic not scummy. Does inaccurate information make someone scum? I believe it makes them unobservant.

[Shotty to the Body]

I wasn't trying to lynch when I put a vote on a lurker, what that does is encourage them to stop lurking and actually participate in discussion which is what happened. I don't think Lynch all Lurkers is a good policy, but at that point we had someone at 3 votes I believe and we hadn't heard anything from one player. I unvoted once he started posting again. Pressure applied + goal accomplished + unvote = scummy?

Cyren is confusing me a little. I said don't quick lynch, which means the day goes longer, which means we get to see more of the inconsistencies I talked about, I don't see how those are contradictory.

I'll be working on my opinions of everyone and posting that tonight since Papa seems so interested in them. =P

[Shotty to the Body]

Apparently I'm retarded and didn't actually unvote until after the replace, so consider some of that null since he flaked. Though the objective was the same and I did unvote after I saw his replace start posting, the flake throws it off however. Writing up my long post now, sorry for the triple if that happens.

[Shotty to the Body]

And tonight arrives early, huzzah! ( Btw melodrama is an integral part of being me. =P )

Phily - Concluded he was town after the first few pages. Albeit aggressive town, but town. I accepted his reasons for 'defending' falko and he's admitted it was a mistake. Don't agree with his no vote or vote scum policy, I think votes can be used to apply pressure. Difference of opinion /shrug

Probability of being scum (at this time): Low

Falkomango - I consider most of the RVS skipping BS to be a null-tell, though it spawned interesting arguments to examine. His consistent floating with the breeze attitude however seems to be either the actions of scum avoiding attention or of a new player unsure of himself, I favor the latter at this time. His post 209 responds well to Giskard and I thought he explained himself logically and it fit along the lines I could imagine him going through to reach this point. Still he could be a very sneaky scum.

Probability of being scum (at this time): Low-Medium Low

Giskard - Joins in the attacks on Phily early in the game, I think he seized on Qwints idea of defending and pursued it. Good effort scumhunting, if misplaced in my opinion. Again picks up on my questioning of Toledo and pursues it, can't tell about Toledo's rl problems or lurking though, discuss that later in his/Cyren's post. His most recent attacks seem genuinely motivated to me (post 187) though I disagree with his conclusions about Phily.

Probability of being scum (at this time): Low

Qwints - Again I think the Phily rampage in the beginning was justified and Qwints pointed out the error/scumtell Phily made, points for that in my book. The drop off the earth seemed odd to me at the time, but finals are a very reasonable excuse to do so. =P His new views seem unannounced but tempered at this point, hes backed off on Phily (post 177) and seems to be formulating opinions as lynch time draws near. His willingness to answer questions brought up is good to me, our fault if we let him slip by if we think he is scum. Though he still dropped off the world in the middle of an attack on him, one way or the other.

Probability of being scum (at this time): Low-Medium Low

Corp - Solidly pro-town as far as I can tell. Done a good job pursuing leads and catching mistakes, good scumhunter though mistaken in this case. Everyone has mentioned why he is pro-town: good analysis, attacks, activity, what not etc etc. I won't reiterate it when no one suspects him. Will have to revise of course as the targets of his attacks get lynched, could be very very good scum.

Possibility of being scum (at this time): Very Low

Here comes the meaty part about suspects, if I had to guess I think only one of the three below is scum and I've missed one elsewhere, but I could be mistaken of course. These will change drastically based on the result of D1 lynch most likely.

Toledo/Cyren: Toledo struck as a very odd either lurker or someone with huge amounts of inactivity. I pointed this out with him and Corn (for short). Giskard made a good point about in 91. Toledo goes on to tell me in 98 he disapproves of votes on lurkers, coming from the horses mouth? I have to admit his RL reasons for inactivity are compelling and I believe him, but still just something to note. Toledo also closes before being replaced that he considers Phily to be innocent (138) which made me get more of a town read off of him. Cyren then replaces in and hits us with a beautiful wall of text. I become confused since I had a mostly pro-town read on Toledo when I again come under assault for pressuring a lurker to vote in Cyren's 205. She herself said

I somewhat disagree with you, I think it did deserve a vote even if it was to pressure him to continue to participate in RVS, qwints was the only one voting Falko at this time so there wasn't really a reason to worry about a Lynch yet. Had it gone to L-2 or L-1 I would say Falko didn't deserve it.

in 164. What's with the double standard between my vote on Corn and Qwints vote on Falko earlier in the game? One of the inconsistencies I was mentioning has appeared. Both her and Papa claim that I was trying to lynch him by putting him at L-4? Seems a bit farfetched and they repeat that fact despite the fact I've said I just wanted to get him to post. I removed my vote from Toledo early on when he posted in the same situation (post 36) and I would've done the same except Corn flaked. On the flipside of this issue her general way of posting has been very scum hunting oriented and she has followed all her posts up well with some form of explanation. This puts her on the short list but behind the two others.

Possibility of being scum (at this time): Medium Low-Medium

Gadget: Gadget has been an active player so far and been commenting on much of the cases posted, building off of other players arguments. However I found in review Gadget's posts that it felt more like he was riding bandwagons then formulating his own opinions. He started the Qwints wagon on page 2, but most of the meat for that idea came from Phily. He then flips quickly from qwints to Phily with little reason in post 58, jumping on the idea Qwints and Giskard have been pushing. He presents some reasons in 89, but they seem thin to me at best. He flips back to Qwints for active lurking (post 134) and then unvotes again with little to no reason. We finally see consistency on Qwints which is points for him, but when Qwints asks for specific points to respond to Gadget just glosses it over, not very town to let a suspected scum off with no questions. Cyren makes some points for Gadget being scum for me, see post 205. There is a very real possibility what Gadget mentions in 195 about both replaces being scum, in which case the evidence brought up is probably a sham and the other incidences I'm referencing coincidental of his style. If Cyren and Zito are scum I think Gadget is being directly attacked by Cyren and side swiped so to speak by Zito. Zito doesn't attack Gadget, just subtly nods agreement with Cyren while interpreting her responses for Gadget (post 211), as he tells Philly not to post for Gadget, let her speak for herself instead of wriggling away. He implies that Gadget is scum by accepting a lynch on him or myself. More on that next.

Probability of being scum (at this time) - Medium

Papa Zito - This is where things get interesting, and sticky. As a replace a couple people have mentioned the halo of innocence which makes it very unlikely for either Zito or Cyren to eat a D1 lynch, but Corn was my main suspect and nothing's really changed with that since his being replaced except lurking has been turned into massive walls of text everywhere. Overcompensation for the lurking charges against his predecessor? I have to concede Corn did flake and some of his inactivity can be prescribed to that, but Zito still feels the need to defend lurking (post 186), why so up in arms about it if your predecessor flaked the whole time instead of lurking like you claim? Qwints told us early on (post 49) that lurking should be discouraged and at least 3 players including myself have stated explicitly, by action in mine and Qwints case and by quote for Cyren, see above, they don't mind putting votes on lurkers to get them to post.

So after defending lurking, Zito decides I'm the most suspicious. Some reasons are fair, its my first game and I made a mistake by sitting out for the first 5 or so pages and observing more than posting. On the other hand, Reasons 2, 3, 5 are pretty much BS. Reasons 1 and 4 are the same thing worded differently and are mostly copycats of Corp's original case. Reason 2 refuted above about his defending lurking and predecessor history. Reason 3 I gave useful advice not a list of acronyms, they aren't the same thing. Reason 5 is just twisting my words, a strong read at this point is relative, not absolute. So we have essentially one mistake as the amazing case to lynch someone, perfect. Not to mention the someone most concerned with your predecessor being scummy.

Moving onto the debate Cyren is having about the innocence/guilt of Gadget and to some degree Corps case for me. Cyren replaced in first and made a solid post reviewing everyone. Zito did something similar, no big deal so far. Cyren's posts about Gadget have much more meat however and they didn't opportunistically take advantage of a case being made against the person bringing their scummy intentions to the front of everyone's mind, like say Corp's case towards me. Also Zito has been encouraging Cyren's case towards Gadget as well. The fact that he joined second gave him the opportunity to piggy back his opener with Cyren's and mark Gadget as a suspect so he has 'reasons' to agree with Cyren. I'm convinced that if Gadget or myself is lynched (which seems likely at this point) and the lynchee flips town that one of the two replaces is scum, most likely Zito.

Probability of being scum (at this time): Medium+ (aka medium but higher than Gadget =P )

------
All this being said I think either Zito or Cyren is scum or that Gadget is scum and they are both innocent. If that's the case then it's my own fault for getting accused by Zito, but if either of us are lynched and flip town to consider both the cases made by Cyren and Zito very carefully. I had a whole other section planned out with the 3 possible scenarios of scum running through my head, but I don't think I can spend another hour and a half writing the explanations so I'll just write some quick outcomes of the D1 lynch and what I would think after that for if I'm not around.

I'll just assume I flip town since if I flip scum this is a bunch of bullshit you'll ignore anyways.

(Me Lynched) If Gadget votes for me, consider him closely. Consider Zito closely. Cyren remains where she is without more info, consider voting status and night kill.

Likely Scum: Zito + Other

(Gadget Lynched: flips town) Consider Cyren more closely, but be careful in case Zito bandwagoned that case to fruition. Consider Zito.

Likely Scum: Cyren/Zito + Other, or, Cyren and Zito

(Gadget Lynched: flips scum): Clears Cyren. Clears Zito.

Likely Scum Remaining: Unknown

I could be wrong about Zito, but I don't think so. He showed up as town on my radar until he proved his willingness to defend lurking and conjured a case out of the air against his biggest attacker rather then defending himself with reason, counting on the innocence halo of a replace to carry him through this day where he hopes I will be silenced.

This is probably full of grammar mistakes and about a billion misplaced modifiers, I'll shorten it up later if people want, but I wanted to get my whole thought process out there for people to see, will check back in later. Peace.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Official Vote Count

qwints - 1 (falkomagno)
GadgetArcrep - 1 (Cyren)

Shotty to the Body - 2 (The Corporation, Papa Zito)

falkomagno - 1 (Giskard)

Not Voting - 4 (GadgetArcrep, PhilyEc, qwints, Shotty to the Body)

5 to Lynch.

Deadline

is the end of Saturday, May 30th (Eastern, GMT - 4).

[qwints]

Prod received. I'll have a substantive post Tuesday; this weekend is busy for me.

[Papa Zito]

Post coming up next, but first...

MOD:

Requesting an extension of a couple days because of the Memorial Day holiday in the US.

[The Corporation]

Re: The Prod. I have nothing to add to the recent developments except that post 205 onwards really has made me suss on Gadget. This is a concern for me given he has agreed with a lot of my observations and leads... if he were to go down and come up scum I'd have to totally reconsider like 90% of my thoughts in the game (for example I don't see my current vote Shotty being a scum buddy). Still if he keeps being so inconsistent I won't have a choice to move my vote.

[Papa Zito]

First, a quick observation: The two players applying pressure to Shotty are both high on his scum list. Coincidence?

Papa Zito - This is where things get interesting, and sticky.

lulz

I have to concede Corn did flake and some of his inactivity can be prescribed to that, but Zito still feels the need to defend lurking (post 186), why so up in arms about it if your predecessor flaked the whole time instead of lurking like you claim?

I laid out several reasons why going after lurkers early on Day 1 is a bad idea in that post. You've failed to address any of them here. This is an obvious attempt to deflect.

Reason 2 refuted above about his defending lurking and predecessor history.

lolwut? You haven't refuted anything. Here, let me recap for you:

1. Lurking, in and of itself, isn't a scumtell.
2. You need to see a pattern of lurking before going after lurkers with pressure votes. Early Day 1 is not enough time to establish a pattern.
3. Statistics make it more likely that you'll hit town instead of scum.

My last there was a parting shot that you failed to even address.

Reason 3 I gave useful advice not a list of acronyms, they aren't the same thing.

My list is useful. Unless you know all of them, I guess. Regardless, you've completely missed (intentionally?) the point - useful advice doesn't help us find scum. And useful advice, unfortunately, is all you've offered.

Reason 5 is just twisting my words, a strong read at this point is relative, not absolute.

A read is strong or it's not. I don't see how it can be relative. Also, here's what was said:

I haven't made any strong accusations because I don't have a strong read on everyone, especially with two replaces.

5. It's Day 1, I'd be amazed if you had a strong read on someone yet. The only way you'd have a strong read on someone at this stage is if they posted just tons and tons of content or if they majorly screwed up. You have to work with what's available and come to some kind of conclusion.

Again, you (intentionally?) missed the point - You haven't taken a stand on anyone until you were forced to. Even with this post you haven't fully committed to anything, because even after all this analysis you still aren't voting one of your chief suspects. To me it seems like you're throwing up a huge cloud of smoke, throwing out a couple names and hoping something sticks. If someone does bite then I'm guessing you'll happily hop onboard.

Cyren's posts about Gadget have much more meat however and they didn't opportunistically take advantage of a case being made against the person bringing their scummy intentions to the front of everyone's mind, like say Corp's case towards me. Also Zito has been encouraging Cyren's case towards Gadget as well. The fact that he joined second gave him the opportunity to piggy back his opener with Cyren's and mark Gadget as a suspect so he has 'reasons' to agree with Cyren.

Classic scum post. You completely fail to refute what's being said (probably because you can't) and instead try to attack the person. It doesn't matter if I joined first or fifth. What matters if what I say makes logical sense.

I'm convinced that if Gadget or myself is lynched (which seems likely at this point) and the lynchee flips town that one of the two replaces is scum, most likely Zito.

Logical fallacy. What someone flips doesn't determine anyone else's alignment. The intent of the voter does. Townies mislynch all the time.

I could be wrong about Zito, but I don't think so. [1]He showed up as town on my radar until [2]he proved his willingness to defend lurking [3]and conjured a case out of the air against [4]his biggest attacker rather then [5]defending himself with reason, [6]counting on the innocence halo of a replace to carry him through this day where he hopes I will be silenced.

This is a fantastic paragraph and deserves more breakdown.

1. Translation: He was fine until he started targeting me.
2. Refuted this 'point' above
3. Out of thin air? I examined what you said and found numerous scummy things, none of which you've refuted.
4. I had no idea you were even attacking me. When was this? PhilyEc has been applying the only pressure I've felt so far.
5. lolwut
6. bzzzt

So I agree that you can't just ignore what our predecessors did. Part of the burden of being a replacement is that you have to account for the actions of the one you replace. Cyren and I shouldn't be considered "innocent" just because we replaced in, so if you have an issue with something our previous selves said, feel free to question it.

I'll throw another acronym out there: FUD. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That's what Shotty is trying to spread to the town by making a bunch of baseless accusations and ignoring cases against him. Shotty really needs more votes.

[The Corporation]

I would also add we have 5 days until the deadline. It would be nice from a town perspective if everyone could make a relatively comprehensive post detailing the reasons for their vote rather than "OMG deadline. I had to vote for someone."

Just a forewarning I will view anyone of that as very suspicious.

[Giskard]

I gave a quick read over the activity from the last couple days. I won't have time to give a thorough read through or post anything significant until tomorrow since a lot of friends are in town for the holiday.

[Shotty to the Body]

First, a quick observation: Zito is actively pursuing the only player building a case against him. Coincidence?

I laid out several reasons why going after lurkers early on Day 1 is a bad idea in that post. You've failed to address any of them here. This is an obvious attempt to deflect.

You didn't really lay out any reasons, you waved off a reference that townies would want to lurk, but never mentioned any of them. The only reason to lurk is to fly under the radar and avoid giving your opinions or drawing attention to yourself, not exactly pro-town. Not a deflect at all, lurking isn't good for town, especially on day one, period. Going after lurkers gets them to post solves the problem, its not a lynch attempt, its a pressure vote, you still fail (intentionally?) to realize the difference.

My list is useful. Unless you know all of them, I guess. Regardless, you've completely missed (intentionally?) the point - useful advice doesn't help us find scum. And useful advice, unfortunately, is all you've offered.

A bunch of acronyms are helpful for reading through posts, not for scum hunting. Maybe your version of advice isn't helpful, but actually giving people tips about what is generally the goal of town and how not to shoot yourself in the foot, especially in a newbie game, is actually probably very helpful in scumhunting in the long-run. It's not a baseless attack, but that's all you seem to recognize as useful.

Again, you (intentionally?) missed the point - You haven't taken a stand on anyone until you were forced to. Even with this post you haven't fully committed to anything, because even after all this analysis you still aren't voting one of your chief suspects. To me it seems like you're throwing up a huge cloud of smoke, throwing out a couple names and hoping something sticks. If someone does bite then I'm guessing you'll happily hop onboard.

Nice one, if I had voted you would've said "Look, Shotty's just voting someone else to throw our attention elsewhere." Good play since you could complain about my decision either way, hope people see through this obvious ploy. Sorry, I like to actually hear other people's opinions and come to a consensus with them before voting.

Classic scum post. You completely fail to refute what's being said (probably because you can't) and instead try to attack the person. It doesn't matter if I joined first or fifth. What matters if what I say makes logical sense.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I outlined how I refuted what you said, try reading the post. What you say is just an echo of Corp's earlier post with a few rusty bells and whistles tacked on to make it look different. You've done the exact same thing with your position on Gadget by copying Cyren. Coincidence? Classic case of bandwagoning and riding the coat tails of other people's arguments.

Logical fallacy. What someone flips doesn't determine anyone else's alignment. The intent of the voter does. Townies mislynch all the time.

Hope you have a lot more lines like this for when you get asked about your townie lynches in the coming days. Intent to lynch town is pretty scummy in my book.

This is a fantastic paragraph and deserves more breakdown.

1. Translation: He was fine until he started targeting me.
2. Refuted this 'point' above
3. Out of thin air? I examined what you said and found numerous scummy things, none of which you've refuted.
4. I had no idea you were even attacking me. When was this? PhilyEc has been applying the only pressure I've felt so far.
5. lolwut
6. bzzzt

1. Ummm, I didn't even put posts in until after you started targeting me, so there's no standard of comparison.
2. Supporting lurking is fail.
3. Once again failure to read the post or just glossing over things that were said.
4. Pretty sure I was the one applying pressure to your predecessor to get him to post, since your such a fan of lurking once I'm gone you could do the same with less chance of being called out.
5.Lolwut this post contains nothing at all refuting anything I said, just more attacks against me. What was that? A classic scum post someone called that? Oh wait that was you, lol good job.

So I agree that you can't just ignore what our predecessors did. Part of the burden of being a replacement is that you have to account for the actions of the one you replace. Cyren and I shouldn't be considered "innocent" just because we replaced in, so if you have an issue with something our previous selves said, feel free to question it.

A post any scum would be willing to throw out when he's under little to no fire and realizes his predecessor lurked/flaked so much there's almost nothing to question.

I'll throw another acronym out there: FUD. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That's what Shotty is trying to spread to the town by making a bunch of baseless accusations and ignoring cases against him. Shotty really needs more votes.

Right, right.... Baseless because they aren't something you can bandwagon on? I'm not trying to spread any fear or doubt. Zito's reasons for lynching me are a load of BS based on the fact I decided to observe and report rather than attack during day one. At least I contributed original ideas and independent opinions to cases that were presented instead of jumping on the coat tails of every case against someone right as I replaced in.

[Cyren]

To me, that would be considered baiting someone, You're baiting me to react in a way that you can convince Phily that I am scum, and from the bat you have been considering me the main suspect and pushing for a lynch.

Um, no. I just wanted Phily to know I wasn't attacking him and that I didn't want him to interfere and give you a way out accidentally. I wanted YOUR thoughts for ME to analyze specifically and convince MYSELF that you are scum. Again, the others should be reading everything and analyzing to come to their own conclusions. I told Phily NOT to post on it and to pay attention to EVERYTHING, not to pay attention to just you. So that alone cancels your theory. From the bat I've considered you the most scummy so I voted and I've been probing and building a case. I repeat again, THAT IS HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME. I apologize for being aggressive and even bitchy a bit, but I'm just making my point.

Which is exactly what you did then to see wether or not i was paying attention

, because ignoring posts, in your opinion, is one of my attributes.

I'm confused... Are you saying I read everything even when it isn't addressed to me? I have no idea what the bolded part means. Yes, it is one of your attributes.

That is how the game works, if we backed off of everyone who simply said, "I'm town don't lynch me" we'd never finish a game.

What exactly makes you think he [phily] is a townie instead of scum?

Again, I still consider Phily as one of my suspects, just not my main suspect at the moment. To be honest, You are starting to be one of my suspects, this is not OMGUSing, but my suspicions are based on your persistance to put me away, with pretty much most if not all your your game relevant posts are a direct attack to me, or includes one, to try and steer conversation towards being about me.

Really? First of all I posted in order three diff quotes of yours saying, he's town, I suspect him, he's town, and now you say he is still a suspect... You in NO way answer the question asked of you and then go back to OMGUS suspicion... YES IT IS. You being suspicion of me because I'm attacking you (no matter what degree it is) is OMGUS. You put absolutely NO logic into your reasoning. I flat out asked you what in my posts is scummy. The fact that I attack you isn't scummy. Our (Gadget and mine's) conversation that I direct at you IS about you.

I cant meta on that fact, and even if I could I wouldnt. But I would like to point out that it is my nature when writing anything, my mother knows it, my english teacher has lectured me on it (but more of said lecture is sexual innuendo and tangental to the actual topic, trust me, he says irrelevant stuff more often than relevant stuff). etc etc.

... Wth? Why even mention the first sentence? Are you trying to appear town by saying you wouldn't meta? It is in your nature to be contradicting and confusing? You got me there, I just don't know what to say that last paragraph.

Overall your post 1, doesn't answer my questions at all and 2, hardly defends yourself or offers any of your thoughts which was the original intent of my posts towards you. I was only leaning towards scum with you, but I'm pretty convinced now.

----

@ PHily

I dont think it was that concrete a result. Thats a bit of a stretch Zito

Well considering you had previously had suspicion of Gadget, what are your thoughts from our recent posts? Even I was convinced.

Last part is just him repeating what hes accused of but this seems to be a failing in logic not scummy. Does inaccurate information make someone scum? I believe it makes them unobservant.

Guess that kind of answered that question but I'd prefer more in depth thought. As for the rest of the quot, failing in logic and inaccurate information aren't the same thing. Gadget could very well be a horrible townie but from his playstyle I get more of a "I'm newb scum that doesn't know what to do" feeling than being unobservant.

-----

Cyren is confusing me a little. I said don't quick lynch, which means the day goes longer, which means we get to see more of the inconsistencies I talked about, I don't see how those are contradictory.

My mistake, when I read it the tone in my head was you saying more inconsistencies was a bad thing.

Post 215...... When I first started reading this post I was glad. Even if its a PBPA that everyone is doing now, you're giving your opinion and backing it up. I don't even mind I'm a suspect. I'll address that part now.

It wasn't a double standard. The two scenarios are just different. Qwints voted because Falko's post sounded like he was saying "I won't participate till blah blah". And they stated why they thought it was scummy. Someone choosing to not participate, hurts the game. Falko however doesn't disappear and still posts. Main difference I was supporting A SINGLE pressure vote. In the text you quote I said if it had gone up I would have said "Falko didn't deserve it" Quints also wasn't asking or trying to persuade others to vote for Falko.

You place a vote on Corn saying "we shouldn't let lurkers slide under the radar" and you call out to people to vote for him too. ONE vote is a pressure vote, but asking others to vote as well (on D1 mostly) is asking for a lynch. It wasn't that you "Put him at L-4" it was the "Come on people don't let him get away with not posting!" sound of your own posts that made me (I don't know Papa's thoughts obviously) accuse you of trying to lynch him. You also don't offer information on other players at the time but center your posts around your vote for CA.

Zito doesn't attack Gadget, just subtly nods agreement with Cyren

while interpreting her responses for Gadget (post 211), as he tells Philly not to post for Gadget, let her speak for herself instead of wriggling away.

This is a grey area for me. I'm not too botherd by what Zito did since he was using it as evidence to back up his own thought process, but in the original case with Gadget and I... I didn't want Phily to start defending himself or commenting on Gadgets flip-flops and my questioning why Phily was "trustworthy" because Gadget could have used anything Phily said to simply say, "I think he is scum/town" because of..." and use whatever Phily had posted THEN instead of explaining his thought process in the beginning. If that didn't make sense just disregard it. I also didn't have anything to wriggle away from. Gadget SHOULD be suspicious of me because he should be suspicious of everyone if he was town, but being more suspicious of me because I built a case against him is BS OMGUS.

Cyren's posts about Gadget have much more meat however and they didn't opportunistically take advantage of a case being made against the person bringing their scummy intentions to the front of everyone's mind, like say Corp's case towards me. Also Zito has been encouraging Cyren's case towards Gadget as well. The fact that he joined second gave him the opportunity to piggy back his opener with Cyren's and mark Gadget as a suspect so he has 'reasons' to agree with Cyren

This is an interesting point. Not sure if I agree with it right now, but its in the back of my mind...

........I was okay and happy with your post until you added the hypothetical future scenarios....

ALL you did was help scum there. Since you wrote that, if you get lynched and end up town all mafia has to do is choose how to best play your hypothetical scenarios off by who they NK and target the next day. For all you know gadget, I, Zito, and you could ALL be town and you just condemned town. Not to mention some of what you said makes no sense. If Gadget gets lynched and is scum, how does that clear Zito and I? Don't answer that but keep it in your head for future reference. IN short you just set up targets for mafia to knock down or you are mafia trying to cast suspicion off you by doing so, OR is a scare tactic. Either way very anti town.

------

Corp - Suss on gadget? What is suss