Newbie 803 - Game Over.

[Zorblag]

Vote Count 1.9

The numbers by the voters indicate the order in which the vote was cast. If two or more players are tied for the most votes to lynch at the deadline the tiebreaker will be the player who has the earliest active vote.

Santos: 3: Porkens (15), Head_Honcho (17), VP Baltar (18)
Claramata: 1: Chiarosicada (14)
Head_Honcho: 1: jammer (16)

Not voting: Claramata, Einlanzers, Hurleys_Van, Santos

With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch. Currently Santos would be lynched at deadline. Deadline is 6:00 PM EDT/3:00 PM PDT on Tuesday, July 7th.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[jammer]

I would lynch either Santos or Clara right now.

Just to make clear, your thoughs are. If I understand right.

Santos.
1. The active lurking in the beginning.
2. The vote at ein on L-1 justified by arguments earlier given by other players. And as a reason just to get him claim.
3. Refusing to anwser questions.

Clara.
1. First pointed out scummy behaviour of Ein, but changing it into a vote after you asked her.
2. Agreeing on porkens with AtE of Ein, and later doing it herself.
3. Forming no new opinion of her own(sheeping)

If there is anything important I forgot, tell me.

@Clara, can you name your top 3 suspects and why you suspect them?

@santos

@santos,

Your wagon now reached L-2. Any thoughs on that?

You unvoted Ein, but what do you think about Ein now?
Do you think he is scum?

You refered to Lupo throughout the game, what do you think the reasons where for the lurking and the ignoring of your questions?

Santos, this is an unnecessary distraction. He cannot explain what El Lupo Loco was thinking because he is not him.

Please respond to HH case.

Also explain whether or not you think ein claiming was a good idea now that you got your way.

Who do you think should be the lynch today and why?

Can you anwser the questions, and give a explaination why you refused to anwser me becouse Head didn't anwser your questions to Lupo?

Make the L-2, L-1. The refusing to anwser is annoying me. And I can't honestly see a good reason why you shouldn't anwser. With this you are just lowing down the pace of this game. And I certainly do not see that as pro-town.
I hope being one vote away from a lynch makes you put some more efford in.

Unvote: Head_Honcho
Vote: Santos

[Santos]

I don't see how he cannot catch up reading the thread and answer what his own thoughts are that were originally posted to Lupo.

[Santos]

Or is my stubborn attitude going to get me lynched? lol

[Santos]

Well, let me give it another go and I'll reread the thread with what I have observed.

[Santos]

Lupo says votes are more likely to provide clues about scum who aren't careful. Since Ein was an early topic for the day we get him voting for johnny and appealing to emotion.

I asko Lupo what he thinks about Ein's thoughts. I get nothing.

Conclusion? Lupo doesn't 'put his money where his mouth is' and offer thoughts on what is indicative of scum's and their voting patterns as opposed to random discussion not being indicative of scum.

-----------------------
Now to answer your questions since I don't seem I will be getting mine since that guy replaced out for being a hypocrite.

Head Honcho doesn't like how I put Ein at minus 1 and votes me. He says that I am scum because I put him at lynch minus 1 and my comments are 'snarky'. (No, I'm not going to look that up lol) Whatever it means, its contradictory of what my objective was with obtaining information from Eins. Eins did not start off well and was changing his votes to other players instead of answering for his own convictions (this is sometimes known as deflecting the attention) and he was appealing to emotion (If you lynch me, I'm a townie, but I tried to help anyways so I think johnny is scum!). ^This coupled with his admittance to giving up was ludicrous to do, but does his surrender mean we're just going to lynch a townie? I request that he should role claim to prevent a lynch as I explained my reasoning earlier to VP. Ein claimed and since then has proved not as scummy as we once thought.

Head Honcho, am I not doing my job for the town in preventing, an almost unanimous agreement, a newbie townie lynch?

VP Baltar says I'm deficient in providing responses. Then he votes me. You don't seem to have this sort of conclusion towards Ein or Lupo when they are incapable of answering questions. In fact, you defend Ein and never pursue Lupo for those reasons you place a vote on me. Seems a little contradictory, VP.

jammer misinterprets this and says this. I said it seems like an OMGUS vote, but it wasn't, obviously. I was being snide towards Head's ignorance to answer anything for his predecessor's scummy play.

VP, we've seen this before, haven't we? lol

Touche'

^This. Especially from someone who thinks posing questions is a completely reasonable substitute for analysis.

IT isn't?

What Mafia forum are you friggin from?

Santos: If ein hadn't returned and had instead lurked into a replacement, would that have made his role more or less likely to be scum?

More likely as it was his first game and he already seemed to have given up playing. However, he did not and now seems more likely to be a newb townie as opposed to newb scum. He did not give up playing on us because

that is more of a townie trait

as opposed to someone who replaced someone who 'lacks responses' and replaces out.

Also, earlier you spoke about getting multiple people to claim day one. I was confused about how that would be a pro town play. Could I get some explanation?

I like how you used 'multiple' as that would entail more than 1 obviously, but grossly stipulate that I would be seeking more than two role claims. You seem to have missed my intentions. Since some people agreed that Lupo was acting scummy, as well as Clar's vote on Ein, including Ein's complete lack of responses towards his voters we would most likely move on from Ein (which we did) and pursue the other people who we found to be scummy. Role claims would be nice, but not at the expense of exposing a power role. IMO, Ein forfeited that right as explained by myself earlier which forced me to put him in a situation where he would die or come out and explain his actions.

As for 'multiple' role claims, that would depend on what we seriously need before we make a lynch today. Since I no longer suspect Ein as being scum, I moved on to Lupo (Head Honcho) as he was my 2nd suspect.

Head Honcho playing around instead of being serious.

It is very difficult for a replacement to be able to understand the actions of the person they are replacing.

You're right, VP. It would be difficult to answer on behalf of someone who was playing incredibly scummy. So Head ignores those facts and 'OMGUS's' me instead saying I'm deficient.

Also, regardless of that, you need to answer the case he made against you because not doing so, as you said, look suspicious.

And you're becoming annoyingly, incredibly redundant. You've made your point, how about you stick by it with everyone who does not respond to cases made towards them.

Head Honcho continues to play around and not answer the simple questions I posed to Lupo.

Hurley points out this which I also agree with in what I thought about Porkens puting Ein at L-2. Ein answered soon thereafter, but Porkens left his vote on Ein for quite some time! Then decides I'm the better candidate as opposed to Lupo and Clara.

FoS: Porkens

for having no ability to look at the entire thread as opposed to singling people out.

Head Honcho ignores jammer, here.

In retrospect I get the feeling that he didn't want to have to write a bunch of text, and he maybe felt like that's what you guys wanted out of him. He requested replacement at some point on either the 22nd or 23rd and if your post had anything to do with it I think it just reassured him that this was not the game he had in mind.

So it would seem he didn't want to put his money where his mouth was and quit.

Who do you think should be the lynch today and why?

Right now I'm seeing a few scum pairings:
1) Clar/Porkens
2) Clar/Head Honcho
3) Porkens/Head Honcho

However, I remain skeptical because there is also Chiarosicada who has yet to provide much of anything. But as it appears my two top suspects now are Porkens because he focuses his attention

only

on the people with the most votes and does not look around the thread at anyone else or pose questions. This shows a complete lack of initiative in scum hunting and I've called one IC out before for doing this and he ended up being scum.

Clara is suspicious because of her vote toward Ein earlier and what VP said was suspicious about her part in being on the Ein-Wagon.

Head Honcho should at least back up his predecessor's ballsy proclomations and place his bet on who he really thinks is scum by what we've seen today.

VP should not be so damned redundant.

Ein should offer us who he thinks is part of the scum team and who should be lynched today.

Chiarosicada should post about what he thinks of my response in this thread.

Hurley is looking the most pro town on my list, btw because he does possess an ability in pointing out scummy variations.

jammer is doing a fine job asking questions to everyone.

Porkens/Clar, I could care less of what they think because they've obviously got no problems against wagons.

[jammer]

You spoke,

Unvote: Santos

I do agree, with some thoughs on Lupo. But unsure how to translate that towards Head.

I think I be back tomorrow, with some more thoughs.

[Santos]

Lupo talked the talk, but did not walk the walk. This condemns the replacement. The replacement has made no attempt at redeeming himself, hence, my frustration with why he gets to slide by due to a technicality.

[VP Baltar]

Lupo talked the talk, but did not walk the walk. This condemns the replacement. The replacement has made no attempt at redeeming himself, hence, my frustration with why he gets to slide by due to a technicality.

Nobody said he is being allowed to "slide". However, your characterization of him being condemned due to his predecessor sounds to me like scum trying to get out of a lynch. My vote stays for now.

I'll respond to what I need to from your post soon.

[Santos]

Obviously, no one said he is sliding by. No one is backing me up with my earlier question posed to his predecessor which he is perfectly capable of answering.

[VP Baltar]

You just said in that quote that you thought he was getting to "slide by due to a technicality".

[Head_Honcho]

Ugh, this is an excessively long post and I'm sorry, I don't usually do these.

/confirm

Vote: Cartza

You can't be serious. You realize this is jonny's whole game? Okay, I think Ein's page 3 case based solely on these two posts was somewhat reasonable as far as page 3 cases go. I don't know how much stock we can put into it though, since the guy didn't even know to bold his vote and that was the last we heard from him.

I like how you accuse

me

of 'playing around' or stalling or something. I'm glad we got this necessary piece of discussion out in the open and can start meeting your rigorous standards.

Maybe I can help you with one thing though, when someone says they want to examine voting records, that doesn't necessarily mean they want to write a discourse on every little lurker vote. I would assume more that they would want to look at people's voting habits on a wider scale. So I don't really see the significance of him not caring about your somewhat worthless question. I am forced to sympathize with him. I do see significance in you using that as a way to post and post and post about the same thing.

I am truly sorry though that I took 'at least 1, if not 2' as meaning you intended on more than one claim. Which, as you have demonstrated you know, is what multiple means. I'm missing where I 'grossly stipulate' that multiple actually means more than 2.

I like how you ignored my question though! Multiple(more than one) role claims are not a pro town play on day 1 unless you're scum and want to out power roles! Role claim is for when you're about to lynch someone, and then they claim a role so we don't lynch a power role! Here's a hint, everyone's going to claim VT or a power role, the scum have a good idea about who's lying because they should be the only ones lying. Every person who claims and is not scum is giving scum more information and not helping us at all because we have to take claims with a grain of salt and unless they're a legit power role or the scum usually they get lynched right after the claim.

What I really like though is that I ask you that question and you go off about how I chose to use the word multiple, which means more than one, to say more than one.

Head Honcho, am I not doing my job for the town in preventing, an almost unanimous agreement, a newbie townie lynch?

Do I even need to say it? You're a freaking hero man. Hey, why'd you put him at l-1 if you were so confident he was newbie town? It's a silly little trap where you get to place your vote with no responsibility for it and if he gets lynched you get to point to your post and get indignant when someone drops the hammer and he flips town.

I said it seems like an OMGUS vote, but it wasn't, obviously. I was being snide towards Head's ignorance to answer anything for his predecessor's scummy play.

I like how this doesn't make any sense at all but you still stuff it with as many loaded words as possible.

^This. Especially from someone who thinks posing questions is a completely reasonable substitute for analysis.

IT isn't?

What Mafia forum are you friggin from?[/quote]

Um, no, not really. Analysis is sort of a question in itself, since ideally it provides something of content and substance for people to respond to and exposes your thought processes to the town so they have something to scrutinize in order to figure out if your intentions are scummy or not.

Head Honcho should at least back up his predecessor's ballsy proclomations and place his bet on who he really thinks is scum by what we've seen today.

I have no obligation to my predecessor. None. I am choosing to humor you though. As for the rest of it, that's what I'm doing!

Head Honcho ignores jammer, here.

Well uh, that is simply not true.

Anyway, what really blows my mind is, you make this huge post about what a bad player I am and make a bunch of absurd assumptions instead of simply answering for your own play. I like how the above post regarding my predecessor's ballsy proclamations is what has put me on two of your three scum pairs. Your case on me is second in line behind "what VP said" but you still made this huge defensive post about me. If you think I'm scum, why don't you put your money where your mouth is? Is it because you know I'm not? :^)

[Head_Honcho]

Hurleys van, I'm super curious what you think about Santos at this point.

[Hurleys_Van]

Well, I think he seems like a nice character...

As for his mafia game though, I mentioned the points I had against him in my second post, and after reading through what he had to say I'm still kind of on the fence.

I think his case against the Head Honcho is a little weak. HH had no control over what the person he replaced into did. Not that it should be completely disregarded. The things that were raised by his predecessor don't really show any type of alignment to me.

[Santos]

Hence, why I am not voting him. I've shown who I'm suspicious of. I might as well go after who I think is the most scummy.

Unvote (?)

Vote: Porkens

[Hurleys_Van]

Now THAT is a wagon I would like to jump on....

Vote:Porkens

[VP Baltar]

Scum team^

Notice how HV can't give opinions on Santos one way or the other, that he's still "on the fence". If we lynch Santos and he flips scum, that is pretty much the game right there.

[Porkens]

Scum team^

Notice how HV can't give opinions on Santos one way or the other, that he's still "on the fence". If we lynch Santos and he flips scum, that is pretty much the game right there.

qft

[jammer]

Santos.
If I am not mistaken, you have ignored what is going on and I asked you should say something twice now. Both times you where obsessed with Lupo anwsering questions of you. The second time, Lupo was replaced in the meantime.

First you you grabbed all arguments together and voted Ein.

Second time you defend(and attack HH) and suspect Porkens(now vote)

Your porkens case.
1. For bringing a vote on Ein, saying he atleast keeps it until Ein responds. And keeping it when Ein shortly responded on it.
~If Ein didn't gave a good responce according to you, you voted him. Why was Porkens suspicious?

2. Switches to you after VP points you out as a better candicate then Ein.
~Why do you think the reasons are not legit?

3. Porkens is an IC, and did not do much active scumhunting. IC + not scumhunting = mafia
~Unbeatable argumentation.

Why do you think Porkens is a better lynch candicate then Clara?


@HV, who is Porkens partner?
If porkens flips town if lynched, who is then mafia?

@VP, the recent budying up, HV having no opinion about Santos and they both vote Porkens strikes you as them being a pair.
Do you think a Santos/Clara or Porkens/Clara pairing is likely?

@porkens, if you could not vote Santos, who would you vote?

[Porkens]

At this point, I would vote Hurleys_Van.

I don't see the case on Carla as particularly strong atm.

[Head_Honcho]

Hey, that was my pick for obscum team too! I guess we'll find out. Let's lynch Santos.

dfh239nina98aSDN9NFAS8DHFPAUH2-FQ9HPFUH;-hh 234q4929qpbp[qbpf9hapdhf

Secret message to your scumbuddies? :-O

lol @ that whole page.

[VP Baltar]

@VP, the recent budying up, HV having no opinion about Santos and they both vote Porkens strikes you as them being a pair.
Do you think a Santos/Clara or Porkens/Clara pairing is likely?

Anything is possible really. I would need to look back at their interactions with one another to get a good feel, but really what we should do at this moment is that you should put your vote back on Santos and he needs to claim (as much as I hate to have two claims on D1). I think lynching Santos and finding out his alignment will give us the most information on D2.

[Head_Honcho]

Santos--

Not to much...Just that once you were being addressed for you lack of posting you quickly changed styles and really picked up the pace...Whats you normal style of play what we saw earlier or what we saw later? Your jump onto the Eins wagons seemed the most opportunistic.

That is some fine commentary to place Santos in the exact middle of your town scumlist. Hehe, sorry HV, but if Santos is scum at this point, your quippy rapport with him will surely be your undoing.

[Hurleys_Van]

How flattering!

The fact that I put a vote on someone I believe is more scum then the other person puts me in a scum-pair =\

I do believe that Santos has a case against him, just that the Porkens one is much stronger....and since people don't seem to realize how non-town his game has been. Well I don't know.

But since Santos seems to most everybodys prime subject.

Unvote Vote: Santos

[Hurleys_Van]

@ Jammer...

Firstly, you seem quite certain the Clara is scum, seeing as every possible scum-pair you've proposed to me she is a member of.

Well I can't be certain of anything, but I will say that Santos does have a case against him, but, again like i've said. Nothing compared to a Santos. Since I've put my vote on Santos now, I would be VERY suprised if at least 1 of these two doesn't show up as scum.

and to comment on your question too VP...can you explain what kind of "Buddying" went on between me and Santos?