Mini 790- Skywalker Mafia: Game Over

[ZazieR]

So when are we lynching Sting?

Af:
-Some re (for Threep, Lab and Sting)
-A good case.

(And I can on ham, so no vote from me e if he de it >.<)

Are there any good cases going around?

At this mo, I do not think so. Main be 3 play have to get re and ma play dis with lynch a claimed mil.

[ZazieR]

I need to do a reread and post my thoughts on all the players.

But how is this go?

[Kreriov]

I think I understand the point against Sting and Azhrai, but why Ortolan

@Sirgonious - some things he has said. This is a quote from when Ortolan initially expressed suspicion of you.

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then when he votes Sting this is what he says

Sting and Zironigous and Sajin have all placed anti-town and opportunistic votes

But later on says this

placing anti-town and opportunistic votes does not guarantee scum

But continues to vote for Sting despite the fact we are waiting on a replacement for Sting.

Finally, he was trying to get a wagon started on ZazieR. It struck me the wrong way.

[MafiaSSK]

I need to do a reread and post my thoughts on all the players.

But how is this go?

I'll post the results once I have time to.

[ortolan]

I did make a mental note to re-read Kreriov, his above post puts him about ~80% probability of being scum alone. The best part is when he says

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then proceeds to list all the many players I've attacked

Finally, he was trying to get a wagon started on ZazieR. It struck me the wrong way.

What struck you the wrong way about it?

But continues to vote for Sting despite the fact we are waiting on a replacement for Sting.

Even though Sting supposedly is one of your suspects also. Also, if someone has been scummy they are a good lynch target independently of whether they are or are not getting replaced anyhow.

[Kreriov]

Do you not see the disconnect between the second two statements I quoted? You list three people as scummy for a given reason then later on say that that very reason you gave does not guarantee scum. You are either trying to give yourself and out for being wrong or you are scum trying to come up with an explanation in advance. I hope it is the former.

[zwetschenwasser]

SSK is partially V/LA.

[Azhrei]

Back-ish. Totally lost with this game, last exam is tomorrow, revising tonight. I'll reread tomorrow night, then post something worthwhile.

[Kreriov]

I think even ZazieR is V/LA

[ZazieR]

I think even ZazieR is V/LA

Eh, what?
Why do you think that?

[Kreriov]

It seemed you haven't been as vocal as you have been. I feel like this game is dieing on the vine and I find that sad.

[Sajin]

mod, how are replacements coming?

[zwetschenwasser]

Bad. Keep advertising!

[Sironigous]

So...

On that note, Zaz and Sajin, do you have any views on Krer and Ort at the moment?

And

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then proceeds to list all the many players I've attacked

Ha, a little contradictory.

[ThAdmiral]

can we just lynch someone to get this game moving?

[Azhrei]

Ok, reread, and back properly. Time for reread post:

List of general opinion:

Guybrush Threepwood

N/A, waiting on replacement -sigh-

Kreriov

Townie. Very reasonable, good logic, etc. Interesting exchange with Orto in the last page.

Lab Mafia

N/A, waiting on replacement -sigh-

MafiaSSK

I think I believe the claim, so townie.

ortolan

Scummy - case coming later

Sajin

Nuthin. Really, I don't have anything.

Santos

millar13

Scummy, both the original and the replacement. Case also coming later.

Sironigous

Leaning towards townie, he hasn't done anything I perceive as scummy.

Sting

I don't see the case on him, really. Null read.

ThAdmiral

Also believin' the claim.

ZazieR

Very townie. Posts lots, has content even with PR, and so on.

---

Ortolan

Case time:

I wouldn't mind lynching Zaz at this point to be perfectly honest. I wouldn't put it past zwet to have made her scum (especially with an in-thread confirmed post restriction). I didn't like her calling up ThAd on a point of detail (him saying he changed flavour so that a mass-claim could break the game then her calling him out on this because zwet didn't explicitly say it was to avoid people breaking the game). I also don't like her insistence that we lynch one of the millers and if they flip town, lynch the next. That sounds like a horrid plan.

Unvote
Vote: ZazieR

perhaps millar could comply with the request of him also.

This really is a terrible case. It's more or less based on "I wouldn't put it past Zwet to..."

Then, soon after, he puts his vote on sting, main reason being some small insignificant point about Miller tunnelling. (Who wasn't miller tunnelling at the point of the game you were mentioning, really?)

See e.g. 101

Then 146, 148, 150 though.

217 is a bit of a backtrack. If he's scum I like his referring back to 178 at the end. That means better scum than I'd expect for someone with a recent join date

232 got his eye on all the millers

238 asks for no mod-kill.

Yer um if Sironigous is scum he's good at it. He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

Sting is just scummy.

Reasonable defence of Sir - I even agree with it, ironically. However, then ending line just doesn't work. Why is he so scummy?

Then, Kreriov makes a point I don't need to paraphrase:

I think I understand the point against Sting and Azhrai, but why Ortolan

@Sirgonious - some things he has said. This is a quote from when Ortolan initially expressed suspicion of you.

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then when he votes Sting this is what he says

Sting and Zironigous and Sajin have all placed anti-town and opportunistic votes

But later on says this

placing anti-town and opportunistic votes does not guarantee scum

But continues to vote for Sting despite the fact we are waiting on a replacement for Sting.

Finally, he was trying to get a wagon started on ZazieR. It struck me the wrong way.

Now, this is a valid point, Orto does indeed contradict himself. And I hadn't noticed that Sting was being replaced, so another good point.

Then Orto's defense:

I did make a mental note to re-read Kreriov, his above post puts him about ~80% probability of being scum alone. The best part is when he says

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then proceeds to list all the many players I've attacked

Nice twisting of the words here. And A very good way to avoid his main point. This is called strawmanning. It is scummy.

Finally, he was trying to get a wagon started on ZazieR. It struck me the wrong way.

What struck you the wrong way about it?

But continues to vote for Sting despite the fact we are waiting on a replacement for Sting.

Even though Sting supposedly is one of your suspects also. Also, if someone has been scummy they are a good lynch target independently of whether they are or are not getting replaced anyhow.

I just don't agree with the last bit, but it is understandable.


Ortolan's strawmanning, dodgy cases, the occasional active lurking (and other occasional typical lurking), make me suspicious of him.

Vote: Ortolan

Cbf making Millar/Santos case also, I think that ones kinda obvious though.

[Kreriov]

@Azhrei - well, as you used my points and added to them, I must say I like the case. As with Sting, however, until we get some replacements in here, I personally will only voice my thoughts and not vote.

@ThAdmiral - I know it is frustrating to wait. But without a full complement of people reading and voting, we lose to much information. For example, the D1 lynch is almost always a townie. You can pretty much bank on there being at least 1 scum on the lynch, usually 2. Now throw in the NK, investigations, other night actions, etc and you have tons of information. The lack of replacements and the non-actions of those being replaced skews everything.

[ortolan]

Azhrei Kreriov and Sting are the scum. Possibly Sajin also. You really should watch out for my OMGUS, it's deadly. I might make a case when I can be bothered, or not. Stay tuned.

[ortolan]

ironic Azhrei accuses me of active lurking when that's pretty much the sole impression I get from reading his posts. That and baseless suspicion of MafiaSSK. I also notice he accuses Santos of active-lurking on page 10, it must be a catchphrase of his. He really should pay more attention. As of 254 he "still has no leads". 277 he has taken inspiration from me and wishes to leave the millers alone.

And you think I'm active lurking? Bugger. I didn't mean to. I am trying to just post my thoughts on the game, in the small amount of time I get to do so. (Which, for the next day or two, will reduce to none, due to starting my first job and schoolwork)

More obsession with active lurking.

334, 335, 344 all useless posts. I dare him to point to three of my posts of a similar nature and then reiterate his accusation of "active lurking".

389 and 390 both useless, that's five in a row now.

424 that's six

For reference trying to get Zazier lynched was reaction fishing to see if any widdle scummies would jump on me for it. And you did. Thank you very much.

Nice twisting of the words here. And A very good way to avoid his main point. This is called strawmanning. It is scummy.

Um yer mate. Actually it's not twisting his words at all when he says something to the effect of "ortolan has just been innocuously hanging around the game and not voicing suspicions", then blatantly contradicts the fact by listing all the people I've attacked. The first statement is made entirely invalid by what he then goes on to say. It had no basis. He probably saw it somewhere else and thought it was a cute line to use here to attack me and didn't pay attention to the fact that is 100% contradictory to what he then goes on to say. So tell me how exactly I am strawmanning him now? Squirm scum squirm. Strawman is a great phrase isn't it, but you need to pretend to use it correctly.

Also Azhrei is scummy for making zero references to Sushi Mafia which he played in and which I was scum in, which finished recently. He's clearly aware of how different this game is to my scum meta and thus doesn't want to mention it.

Then, soon after, he puts his vote on sting, main reason being some small insignificant point about Miller tunnelling. (Who wasn't miller tunnelling at the point of the game you were mentioning, really?)

miller tunneling along with doing absolutely nothing else and posting little. Why is he spared from your prejudices against active lurkers exactly? Oh, because you are scum with him, riiiiiiight.

In summary:

Ortolan's strawmanning

No. Or are you actually going to try to argue that point about me strawmanning now? Go ahead, give it your best shot, I'll enjoy it.

dodgy cases

Yes, against Zakeri, it was deliberate.

the occasional active lurking

Um...unfortunately no. Please cite all these posts where I have "active lurked". I know it is an attractive and easy catchphrase to use as scum but you need to be more careful. And you might want to answer the fact that the majority of

your

posts seem to consist of your favourite catchphrase themselves.

(and other occasional typical lurking)

Again, you need to be careful when players like me will tear down your obviously conceited statements. Where is this "typical lurking" you refer to? How have I lurked more than the other players in this game? How is it even possible I could have lurked/active lurked more than thyself anyway, have you actually read your own posts???

I must say I like the case.

Yes it was rather good wasn't it?

[Kreriov]

Sorry Ortolan, gotta call you out on this one.

Then proceeds to list all the many players I've attacked

Nice of you to only use a partial quote and use it for mischaracterization. I guess anything over 1 could technically be a list, but I think 'many' is stretching it a bit when the only two people I list are Sting and ZazieR. Basically everything you have said reeks of OMAGUS. Doesn't really matter I guess as I won't be voting for you even though your reaction to casually being mentioned in a list of the 3 people I find most scummy seems overly defensive, but whatever.

[ZazieR]

On that note, Zaz and Sajin, do you have any views on Krer and Ort at the moment?

I'll read both of them to.
I'm a bit la as I have to make two ca in a dif game now >.<

[ThAdmiral]

@ Azhrei - Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
I especially like the strawmanning bit.

unvote, vote: ortolan

[Azhrei]

ironic Azhrei accuses me of active lurking when that's pretty much the sole impression I get from reading his posts. That and baseless suspicion of MafiaSSK. I also notice he accuses Santos of active-lurking on page 10, it must be a catchphrase of his. He really should pay more attention. As of 254 he "still has no leads". 277 he has taken inspiration from me and wishes to leave the millers alone.

And you think I'm active lurking? Bugger. I didn't mean to. I am trying to just post my thoughts on the game, in the small amount of time I get to do so. (Which, for the next day or two, will reduce to none, due to starting my first job and schoolwork)

More obsession with active lurking.

334, 335, 344 all useless posts. I dare him to point to three of my posts of a similar nature and then reiterate his accusation of "active lurking".

389 and 390 both useless, that's five in a row now.

424 that's six

I admit, I have active lurked (however, it was more due to a lack of focus and time than any attempt to stay out of other people's focus, or to appear to be active). So have you. Admittedly not that badly, but you have nontheless. I'll quote them all. Oh, and Santos was too.

yer I can imagine

wow way to give me the one with homosexual connotations how about "ort" instead?

Hi ZaZzy

*waves*

Hi Zaz! Over here!!!

Hm, you asked for three. I think that's more than three?

For reference trying to get Zazier lynched was reaction fishing to see if any widdle scummies would jump on me for it. And you did. Thank you very much.

Really? Easy for scum to say that after making a case to see if they could get a townie lynch, methinks. And I believe I considered the option and decided against it?

Nice twisting of the words here. And A very good way to avoid his main point. This is called strawmanning. It is scummy.

Um yer mate. Actually it's not twisting his words at all when he says something to the effect of "ortolan has just been innocuously hanging around the game and not voicing suspicions", then blatantly contradicts the fact by listing all the people I've attacked. The first statement is made entirely invalid by what he then goes on to say. It had no basis. He probably saw it somewhere else and thought it was a cute line to use here to attack me and didn't pay attention to the fact that is 100% contradictory to what he then goes on to say. So tell me how exactly I am strawmanning him now? Squirm scum squirm. Strawman is a great phrase isn't it, but you need to pretend to use it correctly.

Strawman

Strawman is a great phrase, and you don't need to pretend when it's the truth. You selectively quoted Kreriov's post, attacking that which you felt you could disprove, and avoiding the rest of his argument. Hence, strawmanning. Here, let's look at his post and your reply:

I think I understand the point against Sting and Azhrai, but why Ortolan

@Sirgonious - some things he has said. This is a quote from when Ortolan initially expressed suspicion of you.

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then when he votes Sting this is what he says

Sting and Zironigous and Sajin have all placed anti-town and opportunistic votes

But later on says this

placing anti-town and opportunistic votes does not guarantee scum

But continues to vote for Sting despite the fact we are waiting on a replacement for Sting.

Finally, he was trying to get a wagon started on ZazieR. It struck me the wrong way.

I did make a mental note to re-read Kreriov, his above post puts him about ~80% probability of being scum alone. The best part is when he says

He's good at appearing relatively inoffensive and not doing too much and being generally friendly, not drawing attention to himself and largely commenting on irrelevancies.

This fits Ortolan himself very well.

Then proceeds to list all the many players I've attacked

Finally, he was trying to get a wagon started on ZazieR. It struck me the wrong way.

What struck you the wrong way about it?

But continues to vote for Sting despite the fact we are waiting on a replacement for Sting.

Even though Sting supposedly is one of your suspects also. Also, if someone has been scummy they are a good lynch target independently of whether they are or are not getting replaced anyhow.

Note the missing bits? Yeah. Strawmanning, boy.

Also Azhrei is scummy for making zero references to Sushi Mafia which he played in and which I was scum in, which finished recently. He's clearly aware of how different this game is to my scum meta and thus doesn't want to mention it.

I decided to not use meta on you, as I only have a scum meta, and have not seen your town play yet. (Confirmably so, anywho. I might still be wrong ) And honestly, your playstyle in both games has been similar. You cycled through period of inactivity and activity, usually made good points, and appeared reasonably townie. You are much the same here. That is what prompted my suspicion of you.

Then, soon after, he puts his vote on sting, main reason being some small insignificant point about Miller tunnelling. (Who wasn't miller tunnelling at the point of the game you were mentioning, really?)

miller tunneling along with doing absolutely nothing else and posting little. Why is he spared from your prejudices against active lurkers exactly? Oh, because you are scum with him, riiiiiiight.

Becuase Miller tunneling != Active lurking.

In summary:

Ortolan's strawmanning

No. Or are you actually going to try to argue that point about me strawmanning now? Go ahead, give it your best shot, I'll enjoy it.

Having fun?

dodgy cases

Yes, against Zakeri, it was deliberate.

Easy to claim, huh?

the occasional active lurking

Um...unfortunately no. Please cite all these posts where I have "active lurked". I know it is an attractive and easy catchphrase to use as scum but you need to be more careful. And you might want to answer the fact that the majority of

your

posts seem to consist of your favourite catchphrase themselves.

Sorry, what was that?

(and other occasional typical lurking)

Again, you need to be careful when players like me will tear down your obviously conceited statements. Where is this "typical lurking" you refer to? How have I lurked more than the other players in this game? How is it even possible I could have lurked/active lurked more than thyself anyway, have you actually read your own posts???

You had a one week period of absolutely zilch, without a V/La, and had to be prodded. I call that lurking. And all of my long absences have been explained, have they not? And I acknoweledge the active lurking I have done. I am attempting to stop. Like this post and my last should prove.

I must say I like the case.

Yes it was rather good wasn't it?

I thought so.

[ortolan]

@ Azhrei - Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
I especially like the strawmanning bit.

unvote, vote: ortolan

Oh gawd I hope you're not town. I don't think going to bother to read Azhrei's reply, whenever people listen to me the least is when I'm most correct. Lynch me if you like I don't think I'll be able to keep up with so many games in the near future.

[Kreriov]

Appeals to pity will not work. I hope you read my response, because in it I will actually defend you for a bit.

Ok, as I stated, the case Ortolan made against ZazieR struck me the wrong way. I am still not sure why, exactly. Maybe it was because he was repeating something I said. Maybe it was because it was one good point that was not followed up. Maybe it was the offhand way he made the case. Maybe it was because I felt and feel ZazieR is obvtown and yet he voted for her. I am not sure. What I do know is that I thought ZazieR seemed to me to be trying to set up a situation in which if we lynched one of the claimed millers and they flip town, then the other must be scum so we would have to lynch the other next. This is what Ortolan repeated as his case when he voted for ZazieR. So the one point case made by Ortolan was not bad if perhaps not well executed.

Alright, now is the not defense part.

@Ortolan - You say you were trying to see if scum would jump on you for making a case against ZazieR, but the specific case point you made had already been made by me and discussed at least a bit. Please explain how you intended this to work since the point was valid and I had not already been really jumped on by anyone, except maybe ZazieR, for making it?