Mini 816: Revenge of the Monkey(GAME OVER!)

[Snake]

/confirm

[Snake]

Vote: Regfan

because you shouldn't be a fan.

[Snake]

Hey I DO recognise a lot of you

unvote, vote snake

for having a contradictory avatar.

Okay we might as well kick this game off. Anyone got a guess as to how many mafia we have?

Lol, nice.

I'd guess 3. As stated above, that's normal for a 12 player game.

[Snake]

@Dev - Why did you unvote without any reasons at the time?

@Charter - There's a lot wrong with piling on the largest bandwagon. I've seen town quickhammer, so if that were to happen it wouldn't automatically mean isn't scumkill the next day, especially since most scum are smart enough not to to lead the bandwagon to a lynch. I know he was only at L-3, but you voted him without reason and, in post 50, continue to imply that you really think he's scum. Like someone said, it's a tell, so you've become the closest thing I have to a real suspect. Congrats.

Unvote Vote: Charter

@Scott - What do you think of Charter voting you so quickly without reason? I wouldn't say you panicked, but being at L-4 isn't something to make mention off.

[Snake]

I don't think a quickhammer is as bad as people make it out to be. Also, you seem to write off the possibility of Scott being scum, in which case I don't think a quickhammer on him would be bad at all.

I didn't say Scott wasn't scum. Quite frankly it's way to early to tell in his case. A quickhammer can be bad as it doesn't always guarantee scum and and a mislynch is rarely good, if ever.

Why is my voting for him with no reason any more noteworthy than anyone else who has voted without giving a reason?

Because everyone's vote was part of the RVS. You voted Scott without reason

and

said you think he's scum. When you don't provide a reason, it's scummy because it looks like you're only on the bandwagon to push a mislynch.

[Snake]

Plus, it's absolutely pointless for it to stay there given that we have been prematurely pulled out of the RVS stage by this ridiculous bandwagoning and "just leaving it there" will ultimately be more scummy in the long run.

I think the "ridiculous" bandwagoning started with charter. You unvoted after Scott had 3 votes. I just thought it was unusual since most people seem to wait to unvote until a real discussion has started or until someone on the wagon they're on gets 4 or 5 votes. And since you random voted me, I see no reason that you needed to unvote.

No. When I voted him, I had no idea who was scum. Devastation's plea for people to unvote I found extremely scummy of him (almost enough to earn a lynch) and makes Scott look very scummy as well, even though Scott hasn't done hardly anything himself I find scummy. Devastation is trying to stop others from scumhunting by quashing this wagon. He is trying to rob us of Scott's reactions to a large wagon on himself.

You know what this says? "Devastion was scummy, so I voted for Scott." That's not helping you.

How do you say I'm scummy and trying to push a mislynch? In the post where I voted, there's nothing that says I'm trying to push a mislynch. Nowhere in any of my posts do I say or imply that. Here you have taken up the assumption Scott can't be scum, for all I know Scott is scum.

I said it looked like you were pushing a mislynch. And if you were, you wouldn't say you were. Again, you're not helping yourself.

I thought my reason was pretty self explainatory, I was just bandwagoning. Yeah, bandwagoning is very protown, best way of scumhunting in the RVS I know of. If you wagon someone fast for no reason, you get to see their reactions (and those of other people) which is great for determining their alignment. There's no way we have a jester, and if we do, fuck this game then.

What it does is cause discussion. It's not scumhunting. Not that it matters anyway, because you already implied that you think Scott was scum, so your supposed reasons for bandwagoning are likely lies.

People I'm currently suspicious of.
Scott because of how panicked Devastation got when he had four votes on him.

Again, this says, "Devastion was scummy, so I voted for Scott."

You have been on this site for three days shy of two years now. Post like those two years minus three days have taught you something and don't feign oblivion to something that's common knowledge among Mafia players.

Agreed.

Not that you answered my question at all, but if two scum swoop in for a quickhammer, then it's going to be pretty obvious they are scum. You speak of that as if it's a bad thing, but I think it's a good trade. I'm not feigning anything. I use early bandwagons to try and catch scum and clear town all the time.

Like I said before, sometimes you get townies that quick hammer. Care to link me to some games where using bandwagons to clear town and catch scum worked out? Given how many games you've played, I'll want/expect links to least 5 games since it works out so well.

[Snake]

I know. Sometimes when I quote and I'm responding to the same person repeatedly, I put their names for a quote that isn't theirs.

[Snake]

You are totally misrepping what happened. Charter's first post was /confirm. His second post was voting Scott. It was -after- this that Devestation starting flailing around and charter started to hone in on Devestation.

I'm not misrepping anything. Charter voted Scott, then in his next post said:

I don't see any reason to unvote.

Could it really be this easy?

Scott and Devestation being scum together?

That implies he thinks they can both be scum. He later said Dev because he tried to stop the Scott wagon and keep us from gaining info. That reasoning says that he thinks Dev was the scummy one, but decided to vote Scott. Even to this point, he has yet to say anything scummy Scott did.

[Snake]

He then calls Devestation out on trying to deflate Scott's wagon, tying them together for that reason.

That's what doesn't work. That would be like me saying you and charter are scum because he did something scummy and you're defending him.

You neglect to take into fact Devestation's post between charter's. He voted Scott first

before

Devestation's flailing came into play. charter ties the two together after Devestation's post for that reason. So yes, you are misrepping what happened and now you are caught and trying to get yourself out of it.

I'm not neglecting anything. The point, one way or another, is that he left his vote on Scott even after Dev tried to get people off his wagon. I'm aware of the order: Charter voted Scott in RVS and then Dev defended him. The point is that even after Dev made the post, charter kept his vote on Scott while also saying he didn't see any reason to unvote.

Ok, this is much clearer than your other post. I will ask you too, why do you discount the possibility of a wagon on Scott ending with a scum lynch?

Why should we discount the possibility of a wagon on you ending with a scum lynch?

Ok, then, you tell me how you find scum if it's not by pressuring people and analyzing reactions.

Pressure rarely works, especially if they're aware that's what it is. They're behind a computer, so they have plenty of time to think. What I try to do is question, look for inconsistencies and look for slips.

Thanks for the game links. I'll check the out soon.

[Snake]

Charter, the first three seemed fair game, but those last two links you were scum, survived, and won the game for your team. Obviously that means it doesn't always work in towns favor and you may very well be scum right now because of it. My vote will remain on you, but seeing how it seems to be able to work in towns favor more so than I thought, it will be easier to get my vote off you, should something else come up.

[Snake]

So trying to deflate a random stage wagon for no reason is not scummy to you? It does work that way. Also it is logical, while wrong in this case, for you to possibly think that.

There's wasn't very little or too much people on the wagon, so I'm indifferent on the matter. If there wasn't many people on the wagon, I'd say he was jumpy, but if there was at least 5 on the wagon, I'd say he was being smart.

Why should he have to move his vote if he thought both were scum? In post 81 you even bold this while quoting charter.

Because he had actual reasons for thinking Dev was scum. The reasons for Scott were nonexistent. Glad to see he did a smart thing and actually changed his vote to the person who he thought was acting scummy. His suspicion on Scott relies on unknown information. How is that smart or useful?

You are either purposefully neglecting things, or trying to misrep what happened. Either way I think you are scum.

Again, I'm not misrepping anything. It's there for all to see, if they don't understand, then I guess I'm in the wrong or maybe I'm missing something, but as of now I stand firmly by it. But can you tell me what I'm neglecting and how it affects the point I've made?

This list is appaling. We've gotten some conversation going, why are there still so many different lynch candidate?

Do you have any comments on the actual conversation or what? Your vote hasn't changed from the RVS. Has it turned into a real vote? If not, who do you find suspicious?

[Snake]

Snake you got to work on your quoting. Just saying.

Lol, damn, you're right. Sorry. I preview my posts before I post them to =/

[Snake]

Sorry, been busy with work. Not much to say though since it's pretty much the same as last time I posted.

It seems that back and forth with Charlatan and dramonic was pretty pointless. Dramonic said that he doesn't find anyone particularly scummy and charlatan was all over him because he's "not committing". Dramonics explanation was enough and there wasn't much reason to try and condemn him for something he admitted to. There's only been a few pages worth of actual discussion, so I'm not surprised he doesn't find anyone particularly scummy. Give it time and then it'll become a big deal, but until then...

That said, when he made the easy semi-random vote on Scott, I fully expected scum to jump on him for an easy early mislynch target.

So you know it'll be a mislynch?

A lot of this theory about how scum will be in the tail of the wagon is shaky. If the scum is any intelligent, they'll let the newb players be the tail of said wagon to put suspicion on them instead.

^This is exactly what I've been saying. Only stupid scum would actually quick hammer, which makes me suspect anyone who has said they would want a quicklynch.

Was anybody talking about me? Was anybody saying "vote charter, wagon"? No. Where do you come up with these pointless questions? The answer is no, you shouldn't discount the possibility.

So you think that that question was pointless? Why were you asking pointless questions then?

And do you have anything to back this up? I just showed a bunch of examples how they're beneficial for town, are you ignoring them?

It doesn't matter how many you show that helped town. The second you showed the one you the won game as scum, that's when all the reasons to bandwagon went down the drain.

Yeah, 9 times out of 10 bandwagons are good, especially in the RVS. I guess they can be bad, but I can't recall a game I've ever been in where town quickhammered town on a wagon. I only remember scum quickhammering town.

Did you know about 98% of statistics are made up on the spot? Anyway, bandwagoning can only be good in RVS because that's the only time you don't have opinions on anybody. If you were to try that during Day 3, you'd probably be lynched because that's not the time to take risks.

NO ONE has ever attacked that much over something so trivial, which is why I think those that are doing it are scummy.

That's just ta coincidence because it's common knowledge that bandwagoning is a classic scumtell.