Mini 810: Infection! Mini - Game over!

[populartajo]

PP, there are so many flaws in that plan it isn't even funny. You
1) Want all basic townies dead, which would out the power roles and most likely get them infected before they can be killed.
2) You might be able to, but if your plan fails we lose the game. Not worth the risk.
3) How are the townies supposed to commit suicide? Get mod-killed? We get one lynch a day, and I'm not wasting mine because you want to out the PRs and make a scum win more likely.

Unvote, Vote PaperPenguin

. That is probably the most anti-town statement I have ever heard.

BM- Post 129 was a misunderstanding, I thought LoS was Lynch on Sight as suggested. The post 127 was mainly to get his reaction. Your stance on Mokina doesn't entirely convince me, but I admit it was a fairly weak statement. It was mostly due, again, to the misunderstanding of what LoS meant.

Yep, this post has the "Im going for an easy lynch here" feeling written all over it.

I also dislike how fallen kinda apologizes to BM.

[populartajo]

My list

Prob town

veerus
Kise
charter
Kid Know Nothing
Shotty to the Body

Neutral

Mokina
Battle Mage
malthusis
Kelly Chen

Prob scum

fallen angel
Rally Vincent

Fallen angel is scummy as hell.

Vote: fallenangel.

[Mokina]

Mokina, what made you change your mind about veerus?

He changed his mind about the advisability of a nolynch and no longer considers it advisable. Please let me know if he tries to push that on us again - I'm not sure why you like him so much, but that's been his main point so far this game. Reasoning behind your impressions of veerus and charter?

Thanks for asking lots of questions and trying to get discussion going (especially at this point), but I can't help but worry about prob town lists - it's even worse in this game, since the infected are easily able to find out who we trust, convert them, and play them off as highly protown players.

[Xylthixlm]

Day 1 Vote Count

fallen angel -

2

(Kise, populartajo)
Shotty to the Body -

1

(charter)

no lynch

-

1

(veerus)
veerus -

1

(Rally Vincent)
PaperPenguin -

1

(fallen angel)

Not voting: malthusis, Shotty to the Body, Battle Mage, Mokina, Kid Know Nothing, Kelly Chen
With 12 alive it will take 7 to lynch.

[Battle Mage]

thought i already did this.

Unvote

Mokina is town.

BM

Why?

Also, whats up with you being so liberal with your votes?

this is a little out of date now. Whats with your incessant questionning of completely irrelevant posts? What are you aiming to achieve, other than appearing to scumhunt?

Being liberal with your vote is the mark of a decent townie in the early game.

BM

[Kelly Chen]

forgot to

vote Mokina

Agree with pop on fallen though.

[fallen angel]

Reading, will post tonight.

[Rally Vincent]

I guess I agree that NL kills off a lot of the potential discussion, but I still believe it's a decent back-up plan if there's a deadline.

Can someone tell me what the case on BM is? Besides lurking (something that could be said of many here).

How is a NL a "decent" back-up plan? Why would it be better then just lynching the scummiest player and thus having information by that? And again, on which other issues will we discuss if not on votes? Why don't you start a discussion to back up the decency of your back-up plan?

vote: veerus

until you back yourself up somehow. BM has enough votes on him for now.

Why did you vote veerus on this post and not in the post where he first proposes his idea? Do you think that the motivation behind his plan is scummy?

There were two people voting for a NL: veerus and BM. I asked them in #98 what kind of discussion the expected to happen with vouching for a NL. veerus was the first to wiggle-waggle around this, and this was enough for me to vote him then. He explicitely said that discussion could still occur, but neither did he say what kind of discussion, nor did he start or take part in a discussion the following time. I don't know why most of you let this NL proposal slip by so easily. I don't believe in "Oh, that is so obvious, no scum would ever try to pull that". Proposing a NL is not scummy per se, but it is when you don't try to back it up. There is a difference if one really thinks it is beneficial for the town and fighting for it with valid arguments and dropping it "unless we're going to push against a deadline and are no closer to lynching (like now)"

Now please tell me what you think of this NL idea.

[charter]

I'm suspicious of Shotty for 39 where he says "I'm saying while it may not be a bad idea to claim, it IS a bad idea to counter-claim as town since we don't know how many of each role is out there" which is a direct contradiction to what he said in 31 with his talk about a counterclaim giving us a 50/50 chance of lynching scum (which it doesn't) being good, but which requires counterclaims. I really have no idea what brought this around other than looking like he wants to agree with me or Mokina.

Suspicious of Kid for saying literally nothing until being called out for lurking, at which time he makes a prompt appearence to say more nothing. Upon rereading, Kelly Chen pretty much in to this category as well. Kid Know Nothing doesn't really fit here anymore, Kelly still does.

malthusis and Kelly Chen are my two other suspects.

veerus continues pushing his no lynch idea, which isn't a good one at all. It's impossible to win games without lynching.

As for a serious suspect at this point, on a reread, im pretty happy to run up Shotty to the Body, with Charter as his likely partner. Might be a bit early for distancing, but i dont see anyone else obvious at this point, and 1 of Charter's posts made me a bit wary if i recall.

Why am I his partner?

Shotty wayyyyy overreacts to two measly votes in 121.

I don't even know what to make of PP, that idea was absurd.

Kelly's 167 makes me even warier about her. Just unvotes, says a bunch of stuff, and doesn't commit to anything. Looks like she's waiting to see what the town wants to do before she acts.
She does vote later, but her post still said a whole lot of nothing.

LOS
Shotty
Kelly
malthusis/PP

[Shotty to the Body]

I have several things to respond to so I'll break this up into parts.

Not lynching scummy players in this game is a mistake. If we let someone who acts scummy slide they'll just kill themselves that night and we lose our chance at taking down a scum. This isn't a normal game where we could hold them in our pocket till we are ready to lynch them. The odds of shooting an infected player are exactly 1 in 6 if there are two scum and 1 in 4 if there are three scum. Those don't exactly seem like good odds to me. We need to have day time action to give the PRs something to work with instead of a shot in the dark after a NL.

FOS: Veerus

Same question, Shooty. Can you find some protown motivation in veerus suggestion or do you think its more likely to come from scum?

I don't really see a pro-town motivation for a day one NL. There's very specific situations where NL is a good idea and they don't happen very often. If he was truly committed to it I could see why he kept pushing it, but I would consider it at least anti-town to push NL so hard.

PP, there are so many flaws in that plan it isn't even funny. You
1) Want all basic townies dead, which would out the power roles and most likely get them infected before they can be killed.
2) You might be able to, but if your plan fails we lose the game. Not worth the risk.
3) How are the townies supposed to commit suicide? Get mod-killed? We get one lynch a day, and I'm not wasting mine because you want to out the PRs and make a scum win more likely.

Unvote, Vote

PaperPenguin. That is probably the most anti-town statement I have ever heard.

BM- Post 129 was a misunderstanding, I thought LoS was Lynch on Sight as suggested. The post 127 was mainly to get his reaction. Your stance on Mokina doesn't entirely convince me, but I admit it was a fairly weak statement. It was mostly due, again, to the misunderstanding of what LoS meant.

I agree with the assessment of the plan, but I agree that this is more of a noob play then a malicious attempt by scum. Suggesting that all vanillas commit suicide is more insane than veerus' NL plan.

'm suspicious of Shotty for 39 where he says "I'm saying while it may not be a bad idea to claim, it IS a bad idea to counter-claim as town since we don't know how many of each role is out there" which is a direct contradiction to what he said in 31 with his talk about a counterclaim giving us a 50/50 chance of lynching scum (which it doesn't) being good, but which requires counterclaims. I really have no idea what brought this around other than looking like he wants to agree with me or Mokina.

Charter is either misunderstanding me or misinterpreting me on purpose. If you read 31 I said we had a 50/50 shot of taking a scum out if SCUM counter-claimed a legitimate town claim. Charter posted in 37 that he was afraid if town counter-claimed a legitimate town claim we would lynch two power roles. In 39 I say I agree with him (meaning 37 that we could lynch two PRs if a real PR counter-claims) that counter-claiming is a bad idea, but I still disagreed that claiming as a whole was a bad idea. We can judge each claim as they come, but counter-claiming probably wouldn't help us. There's no contradiction between my posts, I remain in favor of claiming as a PR instead of letting yourself be lynched and I defer to Charter that counter-claiming is probably not a good idea.

Shotty wayyyyy overreacts to two measly votes in 121.

See my response to BM, being emotive isn't a scum-tell, it means I'm involved and I care about what's happening. Two votes with no explanations is stupid, now that the reasons have been presented I can respond logically. If you vote with little to no logic you can't expect a defense that has logic either.

Ok, I went through all this. I'll keep it brief for now because I'm tired.

unvote

Battle Mage: I don't have a feel for his alignment but I think his posts have been helpful (directly or indirectly). And I agree with some of his recent opinions on other players. A bit concerned about his NL vote and the post where he explained it.

Mokina: Has anyone played with her before? Is she playing normally? I'm sorry to say that the vibes I've gotten from her are not too good.

I have some suspicions of Shotty and fallen.

I was thinking I liked Rally, but on rereading a couple of things bothered me.

I can't come to much conclusion on charter, malt, pop.

I have a positive feeling about veerus.

I can't see from Paper's posts why he'd be scum. Normally I would take his apparent flaking as a small scumtell, but he's just a Goon if I remember correctly, so I don't guess what happened.

I was liking Kid but I can't remember why.

I'm going to have to flesh this out a bit later.

More suspicions without reasons which turn into votes, can you explain your suspicions of myself and fallen? What bad vibes are you getting from Mokina? I would've waited since you said you were going to flesh it out, but you posted this morning and didn't.

[charter]

Charter is either misunderstanding me or misinterpreting me on purpose. If you read 31 I said we had a 50/50 shot of taking a scum out if SCUM counter-claimed a legitimate town claim. Charter posted in 37 that he was afraid if town counter-claimed a legitimate town claim we would lynch two power roles. In 39 I say I agree with him (meaning 37 that we could lynch two PRs if a real PR counter-claims) that counter-claiming is a bad idea, but I still disagreed that claiming as a whole was a bad idea. We can judge each claim as they come, but counter-claiming probably wouldn't help us. There's no contradiction between my posts, I remain in favor of claiming as a PR instead of letting yourself be lynched and I defer to Charter that counter-claiming is probably not a good idea.

I did indeed misunderstand you.

See my response to BM, being emotive isn't a scum-tell, it means I'm involved and I care about what's happening. Two votes with no explanations is stupid, now that the reasons have been presented I can respond logically. If you vote with little to no logic you can't expect a defense that has logic either.

My vote was still on from page one. Your overreaction didn't seem legitimate, so I'm still suspicious of you for how you reacted to one vote without reasoning. Two votes with no reasons is not stupid.

However, Kelly overtakes you in scuminess since my main reason for being suspicious of you is due to my poor reading.

unvote, vote Kelly Chen

[Kid Know Nothing]

Charter is either misunderstanding me or misinterpreting me on purpose. If you read 31 I said we had a 50/50 shot of taking a scum out if SCUM counter-claimed a legitimate town claim. Charter posted in 37 that he was afraid if town counter-claimed a legitimate town claim we would lynch two power roles. In 39 I say I agree with him (meaning 37 that we could lynch two PRs if a real PR counter-claims) that counter-claiming is a bad idea, but I still disagreed that claiming as a whole was a bad idea. We can judge each claim as they come, but counter-claiming probably wouldn't help us. There's no contradiction between my posts, I remain in favor of claiming as a PR instead of letting yourself be lynched and I defer to Charter that counter-claiming is probably not a good idea.

I did indeed misunderstand you.

See my response to BM, being emotive isn't a scum-tell, it means I'm involved and I care about what's happening. Two votes with no explanations is stupid, now that the reasons have been presented I can respond logically. If you vote with little to no logic you can't expect a defense that has logic either.

My vote was still on from page one. Your overreaction didn't seem legitimate, so I'm still suspicious of you for how you reacted to one vote without reasoning. Two votes with no reasons is not stupid.

However, Kelly overtakes you in scuminess since my main reason for being suspicious of you is due to my poor reading.

unvote, vote Kelly Chen

Due to poor reading? Would you care to elaborate on this?

[charter]

Because I thought he was contradicting what he had just said, but I read it wrong. Since that was the main reason I was suspicious of him, and it's not right, he moves down in scumminess.

[Kid Know Nothing]

Because I thought he was contradicting what he had just said, but I read it wrong. Since that was the main reason I was suspicious of him, and it's not right, he moves down in scumminess.

Apparently Kelly is still scummy enough to vote though, so please go on with why Kelly is suspicious.

[charter]

Because I thought he was contradicting what he had just said, but I read it wrong. Since that was the main reason I was suspicious of him, and it's not right, he moves down in scumminess.

Apparently Kelly is still scummy enough to vote though, so please go on with why Kelly is suspicious.

For the reasons I already stated. She lurks, then pops in whenever someone calls out lurkers. Why are you interrogating me about my suspects but not her, when she was even vaguer in her post?

[malthusis]

Sorry guys, but it's really hard for my mind to wrap around this game. I'll try to reread and post something good today.

[Kid Know Nothing]

Because I thought he was contradicting what he had just said, but I read it wrong. Since that was the main reason I was suspicious of him, and it's not right, he moves down in scumminess.

Apparently Kelly is still scummy enough to vote though, so please go on with why Kelly is suspicious.

For the reasons I already stated. She lurks, then pops in whenever someone calls out lurkers. Why are you interrogating me about my suspects but not her, when she was even vaguer in her post?

So you are voting her for just lurking?

Alright.

[charter]

No, read what I am saying. I'm voting her because she lurks, but then posts when someone calls attention to lurking.

[Kid Know Nothing]

No, read what I am saying. I'm voting her because she lurks, but then posts when someone calls attention to lurking.

No, I understand what you are saying.

[fallen angel]

Then why are you pretending not to? You're taking his points out of context by saying he lurks.

[Kid Know Nothing]

Then why are you pretending not to? You're taking his points out of context by saying he lurks.

I'm not taking his points out of context. He is voting Kelly because of lurking and Kelly's responses to lurking.

I didn't pretend to do anything, he

is

doing a lurker vote is he not? Whether Kelly responds when being called out on it or not doesn't matter to me because that is a general reaction to being called out on lurking.

[charter]

You're purposefully ignoring half of what I'm saying. I was very clear that it was lurking then popping back in when someone calls attention to lurkers. You ignored that last part many times. Why?

In case you haven't figured it out, lurking in this game is a wonderful strategy for scum. I find it very suspcious that she cares that others see her as lurking (though I don't think anyone said they think she's scum for lurking) and then posts again in response, normally not saying very much in her posts.

If I was suspicious of people just for lurking, PP would be at the top of my list.

[Kid Know Nothing]

You're purposefully ignoring half of what I'm saying. I was very clear that it was lurking then popping back in when someone calls attention to lurkers. You ignored that last part many times. Why?

In case you haven't figured it out, lurking in this game is a wonderful strategy for scum. I find it very suspcious that she cares that others see her as lurking (though I don't think anyone said they think she's scum for lurking) and then posts again in response, normally not saying very much in her posts.

If I was suspicious of people just for lurking, PP would be at the top of my list.

I didn't pretend to do anything, he is doing a lurker vote is he not?

Whether Kelly responds when being called out on it or not doesn't matter to me because that is a general reaction to being called out on lurking.

I know what lurking is and how it benefits the scum.

[Kise]

@Tajo - What is it about veerus that you believe is town-like? I'm having an opposing reading of him.

[Kise]

..... hey, all. Thanks for the welcome.