The Manor: Chzo Mafia (Game Over!)

[Lamont_Cranston]

For some reason I thought the other wagon was on Sir, not PM. I'm not sure what I think of PM, I can take a look.

He is almost a lurker. Add that to my list of grievances. He is my number one lynch.

[Xtoxm]

I approve of the

Craplogic => Female

Thought process.

[Stephoscope]

I'm resistant to a crapologic argument which has no merit. She is unwilling to make the least concession that would allow me to accept her argument, therefore she must suffer the results. I tried to help her, she just wouldn't listen.

Are you really posting from Bizarro World, or are you just pretending to?

[Xtoxm]

I don't like PM's press on Lamont, but he volunteered to drink the decanter. I hold that as a pro-town position, I don't think scum would want to.

And Lamont, you have done some things that can plausibly be seen as scummy. Until recently, with your change of heart on the items, I suspected you.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Well that's only because you led the way on a pro-town view which I had never considered. As soon as I saw it I agreed my view was flawed.

CORRECTION: PM volunteered to drink the elixir LATE. My position has been that he adopted that position as a cover.

[Pablo Molinero]

Wrong:

Pablo, post #4, and first substantial game-post

I'm up for drinking it if a volunteer is needed.

I like how you just make shit up and try and pass it off as fact. +1 Misrep.

[Lamont_Cranston]

NO -- you took FOREVER to finally come around and volunteer. I know because I took notes. You had plenty of opportunity to volunteer before that but waited until after it was in vogue.

[Pablo Molinero]

FOREVER.

I believe I gave a "sorry for being away" at the beginning of that post, implying that I was unable to participate with any substance due to RL issues. I'm in the final weeks of school/starting a job. Believe me or not, but that's the truth behind basically all my absences.

[The Replacement]

Just because you weren't around doesn't mean you didn't do something late. Arguing that it couldn't have been a late offer because you weren't around is a lame excuse. I haven't been around because I just replaced in. So I just got here, but if I made the offer to drink it (assuming it hadn't already happened) there is no way in hell I would make the statement that it wasn't a late offer. Not only that, but if memory serves correctly from my readthrough the other day, you also offered to drink after it had been mentioned and backed up that it would no longer have been a pro-town stance to offer drinking it.

[The Replacement]

I approve of the

Craplogic => Female

Thought process.

I don't disagree, though there are always exceptions, but who does this refer to?

[Xtoxm]

The way Lamont referred to Stethoscope using female pronouns.

[Knight of Cydonia]

I approve of the

Craplogic => Female

Thought process.

You please the Dark God

Chzo

Mod with your sexist humour. Continue.

[Lamont_Cranston]

LOL whoops. I was so blinded by his name this whole time I thought he was female. Oh my I'm so sorry.

[Pyromaniac]

Prod received. Will catch up soon.

[Shadow Knight]

Prod received. Will post more after I get home from work.

[Pyromaniac]

@Pyro
I'm not following you. You're saying that if the decanter wasn't in play you wouldn't have made the "scummy" comment thus he wouldn't have voted for you ? This is a horrible excuse. Fact is you made "scummy" looking posts that made Lamont vote for you.

I am saying this for the last time. Because hohum is innocent the point no longer matters. Hohum was saying that the elixer did not contribut to scumhunting. Yet he was using it's contributions.

[Devestation]

unvote

I think Lamont is about to be killed by this shell that he can't let go :/

Is anyone else other than me or him actually considering what the hell that thing is or are you still busy suckering data off of what people did in relation to the last one?

[Sironigous]

OK. I'm here.

Time to read 9 pages...

---

Sironi -- Originally said "definitely someone should drink it" then changed to "nobody should use it." I'm going to call this light +scum

Rule 13 man. -_-... didn't you read what I said?

(did you forget Naomi as well in your list?)

I think Lamont's just trying to bring up points of us to think about. Is he trying to steer the town? No, probably not. Lamont, I can see you defending your case against hohums attacks, but why did you decide to bite his bait and describe him as anti-town?

... ugh Naomi...

Every time you post it seems like you and Lamont have some kind of out of game bond. I don't see at all what he sees town in you...

Sironi -- Inconsistency on elixir policy feels like scummy to me. Push on Naomi might have been opportunistic as well; will have to research.

You call me opportunistic yet you have said absolutely nothing on my points - not even an attempt to discredit them.

Only Sironi is MORE guilty because Naomi did it under voting pressure whereas Sironi had no such pressure.

Isn't it better I did it myself without pressure? That means it was my choice to change it because that's what I felt.

Also note that he sucked up to town with his fake votecount "assistance". He's trying too hard to make a good impression.

er...

so... helping the town is anti town nowadays, sigh.[/quote]

Why did you think it was okay to lead people on that you had the box?

TBH the mod didn't confirm it so... I don't think Steth tried to do anything of that sort.

Voting and lynching are the primary functions of the town. Delaying that function is bad because it can lead to a rushed and less than optimal decisions as deadlines approach.

I've heard long D1's are good for the town.

Dewd, you don't understand. YOU have a crap argument. You either come across with mutual promises are you suffer with your crap argument.

(argument about devil smiley)

Um... Lamont, I don't think you're handling it the best way either... complete outrage over smiley use. o_o

But, Steth's case on that is nothing to lynch over.

See, he constantly changed his views without any voting pressure whereas Naomi seemed to just panic and lose control under voting pressure, whereas before that pressure she sounded logical and fine.

Well... panic under pressure isn't necessarily a good tell either...

How long should she continue to panic?

He is almost a lurker. Add that to my list of grievances. He is my number one lynch.

Er, if you noticed, I didn't post in any of my games except the very small one I was in...

---

I'm sorry if this post seems jumbled - essentially it is.

But, overall, I am still for a Naomi lynch.
Nothing anyone has said has persuaded me from that.

Lamont calls her newb town but provides no defense at all for her actions.
Unless he's giving her the benefit of the doubt, I see no other reason why he's defending her so much.

---

I'll be back to post more on the other cases going on.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Lamont wrote:
He is almost a lurker. Add that to my list of grievances. He is my number one lynch.


Er, if you noticed, I didn't post in any of my games except the very small one I was in...

This is pointing to Pablo, not you Sironi

[Naomi_Saotome]

How can you say that about every time I post Sironi?
It seems like you're not reading all my posts...

And I noticed several people who were very opportunistic on voting for me, and only 2 of them defended their reasoning. You look like you're jumping the gun... I'm rereading Lamont's posts so I can make a decision for myself, not jumping on someone's waggon...

[Lamont_Cranston]

Well, whether or not you agreed with my thinking (and you do make some good points), you might try being suspicious of people who withheld their votes or were wishy-washy about them

without clearly explaining themselves every step of the way

like I did, but whatever.

On the contrary, I find you more suspicious because of your explanations and reasons that you give. The fact that you stated on more than one occasion that it was your intention not to vote until something specific had passed is what I find scummy. Unless you thought it would be impossible to form suspicions until after, I see no reason why you would declare that you wouldn't be voting. No one else claimed that they wouldn't be voting like you did.

Ok, I just did a re-read starting from when Ho came back (approx pg. 27). I see more your argument against Stepho. It is a more subtle scum-tell related argument. I will do an isolation on stepho as some of his defense can be tracked back to his earlier behavior. I am sensing a contradiction here but I need to verify it.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Before the drink was consumed:

The point is that, more often than not, scumhunting is unsuccessful before anything really happens in the game. On Day One, unless something like this comes up, all there is is talking...and it has been my experience that the player acting scummiest is usually just a townie playing poorly that everyone can justify lynching. I am looking past the arguments of what the drink may or may not do to any one player, and looking at the big picture of more effective scumhunting starting right now.

and after the drink was consumed:

I agree we should be careful with voting until we understand what the drink did. I for one will not be casting any vote until we find out what the effects were, or when it becomes very clear that we're not going to.

As for withholding my vote...we have plenty of time, why vote until we have all the information (i.e. what the drink did and who was affected by it)? Although I think eventually I gave in once Lamont wouldn't answer the question about the devil smiley.

While you make some good points here about voting and why scum would be reluctant to do it, I have already placed my vote and explained exactly why...so don't accuse me of wanting to sit back and wait for a wagon, because that's not what I did.

I just wanted to make sure we figured out what was going on with the drink before we complicated things with voting...and I wanted to make sure our eventual lynch would be an informed one, with the knowledge of what (if anything) the drink had done.

Well, I've provided several reasons: I thought it would be best to concentrate on the drink issue and have everyone participate before muddying the waters with votes flying around, and I did not want a lynch to put an end to the day without knowing what was going on with the drink. Also, if I were trying to get away with something, I would not have announced it and then have suspicions such as yours come up. Perhaps I should have handled things differently, but that doesn't mean I'm scummy.

Completely clear, no contradictions, a perfect defense.

[The Replacement]

Out of curiosity, if Lamont_Cranston is unable to give away the shell, would anyone want to try taking it from him and see if that does anything? (like taking any other item that would drop).

Also, Lamont_Cranston, we don't know for sure that you are unable to give it away unless you actually try to give it away in the thread and we see your action fail.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Even if I was allowed to give it away I wouldn't. Based on how the first item worked and how this one is looking, I don't expect to be any volunteers either.

[Knight of Cydonia]

You have 47 and a half hours to deadline. Players are reminded that failure to pick a lynch by that time will result in No Lynch.