Mini 807 - Save the Mafia! (Game Over!)

[DeathRowKitty]

@Wicked
Thanks for the PBPA. CB is a big endeavor.

@anyone
How do you make nifty charts like that?

[stuntkeyboardist]

First of all, thank you for your response about lobster. I understand your first two points (first is fact, second I cant really support),

Why do you feel that you can't support the second point?

I dont strongly feel he's linked himself to anybody. I mean, the only way that that could be true is by saying he voted the same as two of us. Otherwise, I see nothing else that specifically

links

him.

You also asked when he CB stopped talking. I think you're chart helps in this. As you notice, he was posting like 10+ times per day in the beginning. This was all through us voting him. His posting finally began to die down when the target changed and people took their votes off of him. The way I see it, he just doesnt want to draw more negative attention to himself so he doesnt get lynched. I'm almost considering changing my vote right now. I wasnt planning on revoting CB D1, even this morning I wasnt planning on it. But now that I've started looking back on it I do see what you mean. I'm gonna think about it and will decide within the next hour or so.

[CoCo]

Two questions:
1) If you think lynching NHT/Wicked gives us a 1/2 chance for getting scum, why wouldn't you be alright with lynching one of them?
2) Why do you feel one of them has to be scum?

1): As I said, I am firm in my convictions that you and Lobster are scum. Asking me to elaborate on others I haven't come to a definite conclusion about is ridiculous. You are making an obvious deflection attempt.

2): Instead of answering, I'm going to ask you why I shouldn't think one of them is scum.

[DeathRowKitty]

Your answer to question 2 is ridiculous. I don't think they're scummy. What makes you feel they're so scummy one of them has to be scum?

[canadianbovine]

You didn't actually defend yourself in that post. Your post could be summarized as "I'm not scum. I agree with other people: let's lynch someone besides me." CoCo could have given us that! You're not a candidate because you post very little. You're a candidate because
1) You used to post a lot and now post little and often without much content.
2) You're quick to try to direct our attention elsewhere (which you did again in your last post).
3) (This may not be a factor with other people but) your random voting incident still doesn't sit well with me. Alone, it wasn't enough to keep you on the hot seat, but along with the other factors, I still find it relevant.

i didnt direct your attention. we're still talking about me.

I havent posted a lot because i was V/LA and since then the game is kind of wishy washy in content. we're almost at page 30.

You posted more before we were all suspicious of you. Why?

because i can't let myself go undefended and be lynched off, can I?

Can you please point us to where you have informed us about you being behind in the game?

I can't point you to physically saying I was behind the game. However, I was V/LA for a whole week. that was about 5-6 pages of catching up. and i miss most of the coco hunting there.

And as i was trying to say before. It's kind of hard to come back to this game because it feels like it has been moving slowly, thats what i meant with "were still on day 1, and almost at 30 pages"

Soon I most probably will look at his scum meta and town meta and see which is most similar to his play in this game.

i was in 3 newbie games, and one mini

newbie 666 -townie [viewtopic.php?t=9166] replaced in

newbie 715 -townie [viewtopic.php?t=10049&highlight=] started from beginning, gave up on it because mod abandoned. When i got myself lynched, the mod magically appeared 2 in game days later.

mini 730 -townie [viewtopic.php?t=10225&highlight=] started from begininng, i think i stopped going on MS midway through this game. either that or i died. i dont remember.

newbie 685 -townie [viewtopic.php?t=9597&highlight=] replaced in, killed day 2.

now go. run aloft. and discover my town meta.

Does anybody think this seems like CB trying to divert discussion away from him? Convince me you aren't CB!

Hi. It's me, MOOSE. or CB or whatever. That was my attempt to show you I was following the game a little bit. Get my opinion out, whatever it matters to you people.

What post of DRK's are you talking about?

post number 654, i guess it wasnt as close to my post as i thought.

and lastly from that post

Second of all, we'll probably be lynching
you before DRK or lobster.

now in my response to that

1: He hesitated to vote for CB, yet didn't hesitate to vote for anybody else.

2: He has linked himself to other players in the game, so his lynch would tell us more about other players.

3: He hasn't contributed much.

(I would not usually want to lynch somebody for this reason alone, but you wanted my top three, and I guess that's in there.)

1: He kind of disappeared once the suspicions was on other players.

2: Earlier when he said he started the discussion and ended the RVS, when he had woke up without a plan.

3: He is linked to lobster.

Take note of your bolding third lobster reason, and now look at your first reason for me. you're saying the same thing with different words. you wouldnt want to lynch ME for just that either, or else that would show a favoritism towards lobster.

And your 3rd reason for me is null, for why would you lynch me for being connected to ONE person, when that same person has been connected to MANY others [2nd lobster reason]. And you said it yourself, "his lynch would tell us about others". Why would you lynch someone who is connected to only one person?

So in summary [in case you're

tl;dr

]

1: He kind of disappeared once the suspicions was on other players.

I said that i wouldnt vote for lobster for just lurking, so I shouldnt hold canadian to that either

2: Earlier when he said he started the discussion and ended the RVS, when he had woke up without a plan.

3:

He is linked to lobster.

Lobster is linked to many people, and I am going to lynch one of the people he's connected too instead of lynching lobster

.

Are you really going to want to lynch me for just one reason, and that reason being what I said in one post?

Talk about the straw grabbin [picking?]

[canadianbovine]

was that a long enough post for you?

kind of like No hand typer, I had to let it all out.

happy 4th of july.

Now go cut up my post.

[stuntkeyboardist]

was that a long enough post for you?

kind of like No hand typer, I had to let it all out.

happy 4th of july.

Now go cut up my post.

No offense, but dont compare that to me. What you did and what I did were

not

the same at all.

[CoCo]

Your answer to question 2 is ridiculous. I don't think they're scummy. What makes you feel they're so scummy one of them has to be scum?

Excuse me? You're the one who refused to answer things until other players did. Lobster has shown up with a contentless post. So, now its my turn to shake your collar and ask you to respond to the point.

Also, I will go on record and say CB does not appear on my scumdar in the least. Why are people trying to make cases against him? Seems like a deflection to me, especially considering he's been the only one of the three bandwagons that didn't result in a claim, IIRC.

@Wicked, you really aren't doing yourself any favors in regards to getting off my scum list with your blatant attacks. In simple terms, what do you think about Lobster, DRK, and NHT?

[DeathRowKitty]

Excuse me? You're the one who refused to answer things until other players did.

Yes. I was waiting for players to defend themselves before I put words in their mouths. What's your excuse?

So, now its my turn to shake your collar and ask you to respond to the point.

What point? I didn't realize you had one.


You stated straight out that one of two players had to be scum. I'm sure I'm not alone in the opinion that your statement can't go unchallenged, but just in case, anyone else who sees this, please weigh in on this.

You posted more before we were all suspicious of you. Why?

because i can't let myself go undefended and be lynched off, can I?

Very interesting. Especially considering this post you made earlier in the game:

vote: wolframnhart

I dont like how your activity suddenly picked up when CDB accused you. You were easy sailing until someone placed a vote on you.

How is your situation any different?

[DeathRowKitty]

1) If you think lynching NHT/Wicked gives us a 1/2 chance for getting scum, why wouldn't you be alright with lynching one of them?

): As I said, I am firm in my convictions that you and Lobster are scum. Asking me to elaborate on others I haven't come to a definite conclusion about is ridiculous. You are making an obvious deflection attempt.

I forgot to respond to this earlier. You haven't come to a definite conclusion on them, but you can definitively say one of them is scum? What makes you so positive lobster and I are scum? If that was a deflection attempt, it was a very poor one on my part. Clearly, you've been after me for 20 or so pages for some strange reason and I'm obviously not going to stop you from suspecting me. It sounds more to me like your last statement was meant to deflect me from trying to get an answer out of you.

[canadianbovine]

How is your situation any different?

it honestly isn't besides the fact many are considering lynching me, rather then the smallness of wolf's bandwagon.

[lobstermania]

First off, I am very unsettled by both CB and xRECKx saying the day has been going on for too long and asking for a (relatively) quick lynch to move into night. We are in the middle of some pretty interesting conversations and there are still a lot of unanswered questions.....why push for a vote and lose one, maybe two, town (well, scum, but you know what i mean)? Why not flush out as much info and discussion before we start disappearing?

I find it very suspicious how quickly lobster FoS's CB, then when put under any pressure from it, immediately reels back and unvotes from a FoS? It just doesn't add up. Either A, he thought he had VOTED CB and accidentally unvoted, or B, he was actually unvoting his random vote... and I don't see why one would unvote a random vote unless you had somewhere else to place your vote. He eventually votes for CB, but only after regurgitating discussion points as his case.

Actually, Option B is exactly what I did. READ: Post #149.

In fact, lobster seems to lay out his own plan as to why he took the hard route. Set things up with an FoS to see if the CB case caught fire, then under the least bit of pressure, upgrade it to a vote. Oh, and let's not forget at the end of this post when he triumphantly declares: "My vote on CB remains." Good for you.

It was only the hard way to you. I have tended to vote irrationally in other games, so I've been working on pacing myself. It was brought to my attention that people would prefer me to vote a little more impusively

Oh... and how would this be remotely useful? It wouldn't. It would simply distract from scumhunting.

People seemed to have different understandings or different uses of these actions, and it seemed helpful for us to all be on the same wavelength. For instance, I usually FoS someone before I vote them. However, in this game people interpreted that asscummy behavior.

Let's not forget how he dives head-first into the wagon on me, justifying it by saying "there's no way it was a fake vote; why are you still voting wolf?" Note that his previous post stated that he was a bit concerned with me, but was overall MORE concerned with CDB. So why the SUDDEN switch of opinion?

I used post # 230 as my FoS on you, not wanting to get into the previous mix-up regarding my FoS-unvote-new vote scum pattern.

This exchange between qax and lobster is odd.

How do you find that odd? People have been speaking for each other throughout the game. qax asked me to confirm that he wasn't putting words in my mouth.

His next move is to vote CoCo, after not saying word one about CoCo up until this post. Oh, and his justification is that it is a "WIFOMy mess". Really, lobster? You have to do better than that. I guess this is his attempt to further explain his bandwagony vote, but I'm not buying it. He seems too "padded"... too "nice"... too "I don't want to stick out with my case against CoCo".

CoCo had blatantly dug is own metaphorical hole. I was the second vote on him, which was more for pressure to get some (GASP) information out of him (also, do you remember how long it actually took us to get it out? L-1!). On the topic of CoCo votes, I'm curious why you're not skeptical of yourself: you voted for him right after me, however you gave no reasoning in the post with your vote. That seems more oportunistic than mine. And your unvote, and then prolamation that you will revote with the hammer...??

Given the above, I'm going to Vote: Lobster. Let's see where this goes.

Let's see where this goes, indeed. Why even add that if you're confident in my guilt? You are pushing for a lynch to end the day and move into the night. You could care less about who gets lynched. Shame on you.

I did read the fucking game. Guess I just missed it, seemed more of a one-offish comment. It's a moot point, now

CDB's request to let CoCo make his own crazy case wasn't one-offish to me at all. Perhaps that's because it concerned me, but that was just poor sportsmanship.

For the purpose of me giving my own opinion on lobster, I thought it would be helpful to present a PBPA of him. Seriously? Go read it on page 25Overall, I have a feeling that lobster is scum and his scumbuddies are NHT and CB. I think this because lobster hesitated to vote for CB and gave an FoS to NHT when he wasn't voting anybody else. Lobster and NHT were also on three of the bandwagons. I think we should lynch lobster because it will tell us about CB and NHT more than a CB or NHT lynch would.


Vote: lobster

What I find interesting with your table's analysis is that you seem to agree with me on almost all of my posts. I do like your idea of lynching someone to gain info on others, but of course I perfer it to be someone else.

I came in with the intention of imposing a deadline, but it seems like the activity has picked up considerably since I last posted, I'm not sure it's still needed.....

Tentative deadline: 17 July 09, exactly two weeks from the time of this post.

Everyone, please let me know if you think this deadline is too long, too short, unnecessary or just fine. (nobody seemed to have responded to my ast question about deadlines)

Thanks.

MOD: Rule 12 states the deadline is up to your discretion and that seems to be your tentative deadline. That is my choice.

Overall, I have a feeling that lobster is scum and his scumbuddies are NHT and CB.

Looking back at the always-reliable RVS, lobster's random vote for you came right after someone else random voted you. Two other players did this: CB and Reckoner.

Obviously, you can't take the RVS too seriously, but it wouldn't be unheard of for players to try to start a random vote bandwagon, in the hopes of capitalizing on a small mistake. I'll admit lobster had a good reason to vote you (for touching all his rusty spoons), but he couldn't even tell us why he had so many rusty spoons! He even got his lawyer involved (getting outside help with a mafia game).

HAHAHAHAH

I have seen RVS bandwagons and it's interesting that CB and lobster both put the second random vote on someone, considering the possible link, especially since CB later tried so hard to defend his random voting.
@CB or lobster
If there's anything to say about your random votes or anything you feel you can respond to in this, please do. To be honest though, I can't blame you if you have nothing to say about this.

I think we have already agreeed that CB had a very weird RVS.....both times. Even though my random vote was the second vote on wickedestjr, it was based solely on his avatar. I challange anyone who finds my random vote scummy to watch Salad Fingers and then not want to vote Wickedestjr for that avatar, lol.

I am suspicious of xRECKx, but I will let it go for today, since he has claimed. We can see what happens during the night; I think that will supply a lot of evidence towards him one way, or another.
I am going to

Unvote: CoCo

. He seems like town playing a very bad game. I am going to take a little time and re-evaluate where I think my vote should go.

Any questions?

[DeathRowKitty]

it honestly isn't besides the fact many are considering lynching me, rather then the smallness of wolf's bandwagon.

You don't actually have any votes on you and yet your posting has increased. Just for the record, you've posted 4 times so far today, something you haven't done since June 18.

How many votes/how much suspicion must one have on him before he's allowed to increase his posting? More to my point: explain to me why you feel it's alright for your posting to increase, when it wasn't alright for wolf's posting to increase.

[canadianbovine]

yet everyone is discussing me as a valuable lynch candidate for the deadline. wolf was just getting attacked by CDB, then i voted, then another person voted. that was it. it was fairly early in the game still.

[CoCo]

Everyone, CB?
I'm not.

[CoCo]

Oops! Forgot to add that I will be MIA for a few days barring random internet luck such as I had today. I know I mentioned it before, but I might as well make sure everyone knows...

[xRECKONERx]

It's too late and I'm too tired to even begin to describe how horrible lobster's defense is, but I'll just say... when the FUCK did I ever say I'm just pushing for a lynch and I don't care who it is? Nice job of putting words in my mouth, lobscum. Oh, and lobster... please provide examples of other games where you've participated. I want to meta your "I always FoS then upgrade to a vote" claim.

Oh, also, you probably should've posted WHY you were voting CoCo when you voted him instead of ignoring him the entire game up until that post then laying down a vote out of fucking nowhere.

[Wickedestjr]

I am perfectly happy lynching either DRK or Lobster.

What makes you want to lynch DRK?

NHT and Wicked are the pivot in which the game is held. One of them is scum, but I have no idea which.

What makes you think that one of us has to be scum?

[Wickedestjr]

I can fully agree with reckoner in his 330 when he brings up wicked's contradictions

Did you see my defense to this? If so, what did you think?

and his distancing of reckoner.

What has given you the impression that I'm distancing myself from Reckoner?

lol, especially after the lurker comment above it. It could be coincidence, but it looks to me like it'd be too much of a coincidence that he posts 1 hour after being called out on lurking.

I don't lurk, regardless of my allignment, but if you don't believe me, then consider the fact that people had been waiting for me to post from 9:16 p.m. - 11:07 a.m. Fourteen hours. Is fourteen hours a big coincidence?

"@xRx - Do you plan on killing anybody tonight?"

~ wicked (364).
Fishing. Period.

Okay I admit, that was fishing, but I did not realize it at the time. I think I later asked CDB what the problem with that question was.

"Now that the bandwagon on him has died, he seems to be deflecting attention away from him."

~ wicked (#368).

Do you have a comment about this? Why did you bring it up?

nht, drk, wicked: what did you hope to achieve with the little math/stats posting? Let me be very suggestive: to appear protown by using theory discussion?

Well, personally, I saw nht and drk talking about statistics, and I thought the information I generated would be of good use to them. No, it was not a scheme to appear pro-town, I was trying to help.

At this point I'm going to have to out my suspicions in the general wicked-coco direction. More towards coco than wicked if needed to make a choice.

So you find me suspicious for the contradiction, distancing myself from reckoner, and the thing about me fishing? Anything else I missed?

[ChannelDelibird]

Catching up now.

[Wickedestjr]

i didnt direct your attention. we're still talking about me.

That just means it didn't work. We are talking about you because you tried doing this.

I havent posted a lot because i was V/LA and since then the game is kind of wishy washy in content. we're almost at page 30.

When did your vacation begin and end?

You posted more

before

we were all suspicious of you. Why?

because i can't let myself go undefended and be lynched off, can I?

I'm not talking about when you were defending yourself. I am talking about before we were even suspicious of you, and after we were voting you.

Can you please point us to where you have informed us about you being behind in the game?

I can't point you to physically saying I was behind the game. However, I was V/LA for a whole week. that was about 5-6 pages of catching up. and i miss most of the coco hunting there.

And as i was trying to say before. It's kind of hard to come back to this game because it feels like it has been moving slowly, thats what i meant with "were still on day 1, and almost at 30 pages"

If you don't even have proof of you saying that you were behind, then how were we supposed to believe you? 5-6 pages of catching up is not that much. Especially for a person like you that was able to post as much as they did on June 13th.

now go. run aloft. and discover my town meta.

Oh, that could be a problem.

Does anybody think this seems like CB trying to divert discussion away from him? Convince me you aren't CB!

Hi. It's me, MOOSE. or CB or whatever. That was my attempt to show you I was following the game a little bit. Get my opinion out, whatever it matters to you people.

Why didn't you point out your suspicions of DRK until we suspected you then?

What post of DRK's are you talking about?

post number 654, i guess it wasnt as close to my post as i thought.

Okay, here's DRK's post, now what did you find scummy about it;

Not particularly. His CB FoS, un-random vote, vote CB sequence made perfect sense to me. When CDB brought up reasons not to withhold a vote D1, lobster started using his vote more liberally. It did seem like he succumbed too easily to pressure to vote CB, but he said it was because he agreed with CDB and he's been following it the rest of the game.

Second of all, we'll probably be lynching
you before DRK or lobster.

now in my response to that

1: He hesitated to vote for CB, yet didn't hesitate to vote for anybody else.

2: He has linked himself to other players in the game, so his lynch would tell us more about other players.

3: He hasn't contributed much.

(I would not usually want to lynch somebody for this reason alone, but you wanted my top three, and I guess that's in there.)

1: He kind of disappeared once the suspicions was on other players.

2: Earlier when he said he started the discussion and ended the RVS, when he had woke up without a plan.

3: He is linked to lobster.

Take note of your bolding third lobster reason, and now look at your first reason for me. you're saying the same thing with different words. you wouldnt want to lynch ME for just that either, or else that would show a favoritism towards lobster.

And your 3rd reason for me is null, for why would you lynch me for being connected to ONE person, when that same person has been connected to MANY others [2nd lobster reason]. And you said it yourself, "his lynch would tell us about others". Why would you lynch someone who is connected to only one person?

So in summary [in case you're

tl;dr

]

1: He kind of disappeared once the suspicions was on other players.

I said that i wouldnt vote for lobster for just lurking, so I shouldnt hold canadian to that either

2: Earlier when he said he started the discussion and ended the RVS, when he had woke up without a plan.

3:

He is linked to lobster.

Lobster is linked to many people, and I am going to lynch one of the people he's connected too instead of lynching lobster

.

Point three for lobster is way different from point 1 for you. In point three for lobster, he didn't post a lot. Point one for you was not because you weren't posting much, it is because you were posting a lot, and then once we were moving on to other suspicions, you posted less.

Are you really going to want to lynch me for just one reason, and that reason being what I said in one post?

No, of course I wouldn't want to lynch you for one reason alone. Which is why I have three.

Talk about the straw grabbin

You are the one grabbing at straws. You are trying to point out suspicions of other players, to deflect the attention away from you. You have done it once already so far in the PBPA of you.


Oh and one more thing;

1: He kind of disappeared once the suspicions was on other players.

I said that i wouldnt vote for lobster for just lurking, so I shouldnt hold canadian to that either

2: Earlier when he said he started the discussion and ended the RVS, when he had woke up without a plan.

3:

He is linked to lobster.

Lobster is linked to many people, and I am going to lynch one of the people he's connected too instead of lynching lobster

.

This is complete crap.

[Wickedestjr]

Mod I accidentally double posted. Can you please delete one of my previous two posts. Thank you.

[Wickedestjr]

was that a long enough post for you?

Nope not really, it only made me more suspicious of you to tell you the truth.

[Wickedestjr]

Also, I will go on record and say CB does not appear on my scumdar in the least. Why are people trying to make cases against him? Seems like a deflection to me, especially considering he's been the only one of the three bandwagons that didn't result in a claim, IIRC.

What have I done that is scummy? I'm not deflecting attention. I haven't even had a large bandwagon to deflect attention away from. It would be scummy if I didn't have a good case against CB, but I feel that I do.

@Wicked, you really aren't doing yourself any favors in regards to getting off my scum list with your blatant attacks. In simple terms, what do you think about Lobster, DRK, and NHT?

I don't care if I'm on people's scum lists. Sure, I want to know why, and I'll defend myself, but only because my lynch will not help the town any and it will help scum.

My reads on Lobster, DRK, and NHT.

Lobster - Scum
DRK - Town
NHT - Neutral

I have NHT as neutral, because there are some others that I'm thinking might be linked with lobster and CB. I would rather not say yet though, because I'm gathering more evidence.

[Wickedestjr]

You stated straight out that one of two players had to be scum. I'm sure I'm not alone in the opinion that your statement can't go unchallenged, but just in case, anyone else who sees this, please weigh in on this.

I agree with you DRK.


@CoCo - Why are you suspicious of NHT?