Newbie 814(over!)

[sam.samhorn]

confirm

[sam.samhorn]

V/LA until Sunday.

[sam.samhorn]

Stop the Violence man

Vote:

No body

This comes off as anti-town. Remember, two people here are scum and its the town's goal to track them down. By opting not to vote and saying others shouldn't as well, your acting against the town. I also think its odd that after saying this, you suddenly change your mind and vote for the first person to place a vote on you.

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic and you took that entirely out of context.

[sam.samhorn]

I see no point in voting in the RVS as we could kill a citizen.

(Sorry, I was away for a couple of days.)

I don't see a point either. People who see that as some sort of scumtell are scummy in themselves.

[sam.samhorn]

I see no point in voting in the RVS as we could kill a citizen.

(Sorry, I was away for a couple of days.)

I don't see a point either. People who see that as some sort of scumtell are scummy in themselves.

I'm sure your referring to me when you say that. To elaborate, I wasn't saying Brandor's behavior was off simply because he didn't vote, but because he posted just to say that he was choosing to vote for nobody. To me, that looked like he was just trying to make people think that he's sympathetic towards the town. Why do you think that finding this suspicious is scummy of me? (BTW, I didn't realize that saying you were voting for no one was common in newbie games. Meji saying that did change my mind a bit on the matter.)

I come out in every game during the random voting stage and claim I am not voting anyone. It's meaningless filler before the game gets underway anyways, and is totally pointless. To not like the concept is not scummy at all IMO, and people who try to feign a case like you have are either overanalyzing or trying to create a case out of nothing.

[sam.samhorn]

If I wasn't clear enough earlier(in post 47), I already admitted that I was probably over analyzing his post.

I don't think you're scum at all no worries.

[sam.samhorn]

Ya newbs like to talk a bunch.

Not this game they don't. Discussion has pretty much stalled entirely, which isn't uncommon at this point in the game.

Someone try to make a case against me and we'll go from there.

[sam.samhorn]

unvote, vote sam.samhorn

1. Mixed messages on the Vaya and Random Vote bit . . . first sam says 'People who see that as some sort of scumtell are scummy in themselves', then says doesnt think vaya is scum. Uhmm?

2. While sam doesnt like RVS, okay, but if your going to be different need to show an alternative approach. Sam has posted 5 times with anything resembling content . . . . and hasnt actually shown much in the way of scum hunting in that content . . . until we get to point 3

3. Sam asks to make a case against him!? What sort of weird town move is that, town should want the attention to focus on those they think are scummy . . . . but then, scum dont want to be focused on either. It doesnt make sense, pure WIFOM whackiness

Wow, this is a good case for being this early in the game.

1. It's not a penultimate scum tell, people just tend to be scummier than normal when they do that, and I already placed most of my reasoning for not voting Vaya due to overanalyzing that post. There's a difference between scummy and overanalytical.

2. Nobody's made any posts regarding scumhunting until your post, so you'd have to fault everyone else for doing so as well.

3. I'm trying to generate town discussion here by asking people to make a case on me. Hopefully it works.

[sam.samhorn]

Since you asked, My thoughts on Meji's argument against samhorn.

1. I too did think that this was weird. Sam.samhorn, was there anything I said in particular that made you believe that I wasn't scum, but simply overanalytical?

You've had other behaviors in this game that would imply to me that you are a bit overanalytical.

2. Meji does have a point here too. It's one thing if sam.samhorn doesn't like random voting, but he hasn't done much of anything else to scumhunt in his own way. Maybe the same could be said of others, but at least their random voting has done something to get things going.

3. I do think it is a little odd that he said "make a case against me" instead of trying to make a case against someone else. Wouldn't you think the latter would be more helpful for tracking down scum, assuming he's town?

I'm just trying to stimulate discussion, which I guess I did temporarily. I haven't done much of scumhunting yet because I haven't found much content to make a case on someone for, and I don't present a scumhunting case until I find that someone is scummy. 4 pages in isn't enough to do that.

[sam.samhorn]

yeah i've just been busy

OK then post something of substance or I'll vote for you.

[sam.samhorn]

Sam didnt say Gotor was being scummy, he just said 'contribute or else'

He has 24 hours from this post to contribute or I'll policy vote him.

[sam.samhorn]

VOTE: GOTOR13

[sam.samhorn]

First of all i will like to let everyone knows that im not that good with the whole case building yet, and given that english is not my first language i hope you understand.


Why i voted legomaniac in the first place?, because of his ambivalence, He was just following bandwagon after bandwagon without a slim evidence to support his action. Just, someone said so. Then the whole joke thing gave me goose bumps. There was no need for a change in votes if it was a joke then. Why? because there was no hard evidence against none of them, meaning no threat at all. After we jump to get to know him better, suddenly he is going to a cottage.

Then is the why i think these two are in cahoots? Because if they are mafia they know each other, there is no way they will be pointing to each other, it will be just to distract the attention as i have seen in other games.

Also his vote on Meji has no evidence at all. What we should do? Get rid of unproductive characters and start the scumhunt.

BTW, if any of you guys manage to convince that he is iinnocent i will not hesitate to take into consideration the arguments.

You are scummy. I will vote you once GOTOR posts something or he gets replaced.

[sam.samhorn]

It's time we replaced GOTOR13. Or lynched him.

[sam.samhorn]

Because other than not posting gotor hasnt been interesting

Up and vanishing is pretty much a null tell

Thus, I would much rather vote for interesting people

This.

UNVOTE

Rereading the last couple pages...

[sam.samhorn]

I think I know both of the mafia. I'm going to

vote itacv2

now that he's started lurking after the pressure started building up on him. Also he's been just really scummy the entire game. I'd prefer not to reveal my other suspect at this point, I'll do it soon.

Anyways itacv2 you are now at L-1. What do you have to say for yourself? Roleclaim or die.

Sam what do you think about a no lynch?

No lynches are virtually always bad.

[sam.samhorn]

I find your reasoning for voting itacvw quite strange Sam. It is strange because you have no reasoning. You have decided itacv2 is scum but you give no backing to your belief.

What are your reasons for believing him to be scum?

I thought it was obvious why he's mafia. I'll have why I think he's mafia coming up later today, I don't have time right now.

You seem to be active lurking.
You are distracting people from trying to actively scum search by wanting them to build a case on you.

I only did this when discussion stalled in order to get discussion going.

You are voting people and stating they are scum without giving reasons.
You make grande statements that you know who the scum are but then want to keep the info to yourself.

I will also reveal my reasoning for why I think I know the other mafia player too in my next post. Also, I make grand statements first and vote in every single game I play before spewing content...it's just the way I tend to operate.[/quote]

[sam.samhorn]

I'm going to be V/LA this weekend until Monday the 3rd.

[sam.samhorn]

Sam I didn't see you answer this question please do so now.

Sam why did you clear Vaya as scum in your iso post 5?

Sorry, I saw this question earlier but forgot to answer it. I didn't clear Vaya, I just didn't think that particular instance of Vaya doing something scummy was scummy in and of itself. Vaya could very well be mafia -- I haven't cleared anyone other than myself.

[sam.samhorn]

OK guys here's why I find itacv2 scummy.

Originally this post below seemed pretty harmless, but the bolded part in the quote really piqued my interest. Take a look.

First of all i will like to let everyone knows that im not that good with the whole case building yet, and given that english is not my first language i hope you understand.


Why i voted legomaniac in the first place?, because of his ambivalence, He was just following bandwagon after bandwagon without a slim evidence to support his action. Just, someone said so. Then the whole joke thing gave me goose bumps. There was no need for a change in votes if it was a joke then. Why? because there was no hard evidence against none of them, meaning no threat at all. After we jump to get to know him better, suddenly he is going to a cottage.

Then is the why i think these two are in cahoots? Because if they are mafia they know each other, there is no way they will be pointing to each other, it will be just to distract the attention as i have seen in other games.

Also his vote on Meji has no evidence at all. What we should do? Get rid of unproductive characters and start the scumhunt.

BTW, if any of you guys manage to convince that he is iinnocent i will not hesitate to take into consideration the arguments.

I really didn’t like this quote. Who goes out of their way to say that they’ll flake to people who argue that lego isn’t scum? Usually when I have a case on someone I’m confident enough in my case to not have a desire to waffle on him/her; usually it’s assumed if I’m dead wrong and not on the right track the rest of the town will point out my flaws and I’ll back off.
However all I said was “you’re scummy” at that point and continued mock-voting GOTOR while he was still lurking. He then responded:

Just to say, that trying to get the attention off yourself has served better to point you out of the rest. I do think that you might be scum, while covering your tracks behind the scumhunter character.

Is he suggesting I’m trying to take the attention off myself (when there is none) and trying to place it on him instead?

I mean sure that ended up happening but at the time there was virtually no attention on either of us and that implied to me that he’s trying to pull a case out of his ass more than anything. It’s clear he did that with his case on lego, with his qualifier in his post that he wasn’t fully confident in his case. Building cases on people and acting on them waffly isn’t what a townsperson does when they’re operating, so I see him as scum.

Then he posts this:

Wow lego thats a cheap shot, I just say that he is also acting scummy. But the i still think that u are the one.

I said why i thought he was scummy too,, he just has being distracting, and not helping in the scum hunting. Thats it. That aside.

Lego u coming back, seeing that i have the attention now, and voting for me all of a sudden. U are saying i act scummy, why? Others say so.

Im not acting scummy. BTW, guys be carefull, and watch how the votes jumped behind me. If im lynched you will have something to work from there.

Hmm. Sounds ominous, like the town is going to pay if we lynch him.
One of my favorite scumtells are people who try to trick the town into fearing that their lynch will have higher consequences. Town cops, for example, have their cop claim to back up on and don’t need to use fearmongering to prove their innocence.

So there you have it.

[sam.samhorn]

My other scum suspect is atma. I'll take a closer look at him tomorrow.

[sam.samhorn]

Uhm, tomorrow the thread will likely be locked

By 'tomorrow' I actually mean 'day two.' Assuming I'm not dead, of course.

[sam.samhorn]

OK I'm still thinking atma. Let me take another look through the thread and recompile my evidence.

[sam.samhorn]

Sorry I've been away -- business got the best of me, and I was gone this last weekend...

Now let me make sure I have everything up to date here with 100% accuracy. Vaya found lego as scum and noone counterclaimed the cop?

I'll post my thoughts on atma later today. Also, Vaya's criticism of me not addressing lego.

[sam.samhorn]

Sam, you've been saying you'll post your thoughts on me for the past week or so. It seems you would know your reasons pretty well then, so I wonder why it is taking so long. Though I must say, it is much harder to create reasons for why I am mafia if you yourself are mafia.

I haven't had the time to sit down, reread your posts, and write my thoughts down yet.

I was away from the internet virtually all last week -- work and life got the better of me. Tomorrow -- I promise.

[sam.samhorn]

Look, if Lego is a confirmed scum, everything else can wait until tomorrow. I understand I'm to be the focal point of discussion , as the lack of connections between lego and I has been addressed and is legitimate. However they're wrong, and I'll do everything I can to help the town prevent their lynch.

Anyways, you don't bypass lynching a confirmed scum to catch another target today. We must lynch lego.

vote: legomaniac

[sam.samhorn]

Found some time to post thoughts on atma. Don't hammer yet.

[sam.samhorn]

Alright sorry this took so long. I haven’t had any kind of detailed post in forever.

Here, way back in day one, is what originally piqued my interest in atma:

vote GOTOR13

clearly, GOTOR won't be contributing anything and it seems weird that he would bother to stop by but not say anything remotely useful. so I would be okay with this lynch.

But, also I would like to FOS Vaya, his last few posts just don't go over well with me, one is him using someone else's reasoning for his own vote without adding anything. Also, he was defending legomaniac, which seems odd. I'm pretty sure legomaniac can defend himself, just seems odd.

This post in and of itself didn’t seem too harmless but I made a mental note to watch where atma would go with his vote of GOTOR. There was a difference in reasoning between when I voted for GOTOR and why atma did; mine was a clear policy vote because GOTOR didn’t seem interested in participating at all and I voted him with the message “either post or get replaced, please.”

Atma seemingly used hit vote on GOTOR as a legitimate post for lurking, which I’ve never bought into. So I kept watch. Here’s what came after:

why would you not want to lynch gotor13 just cause he might be replaced? fact of the matter is, you base your vote off how someone is currently, not a future possibility. its just not logical to think like that.

I understand what are you saying but consider this: lurking is sometimes considered to be scummy, so what if GOTOR was lurking but covering it by saying he was busy and away etc.? that was my point. but it was made sort of a moot point when mr. moderator just told us he is going to be replaced soon. eh.

Later he admitted that he didn’t know GOTOR was just inactive and vanished out of nowhere and unvoted him. But his reasons for voting him seemed really scummy-opportunistic, as he fruitfully attacked a lurker and tried to use it as a legitimate case.

What really got me was this post though:

First of all,

Unvote GOTOR13/Manzcar

Now that he has been replaced, no reason for my vote to be on him at the moment.

Atma why do you want to lynch a lurker? Do you think this is pro town? Who is your top suspect and why?

As I tried to explain in a previous post, it wasn't so much the fact that he was lurking, but more the fact that he dropped by to say he was around and almost immediately turned around and said he was leaving, without providing even a single tiny snippet of content. To me, it just seemed like he was trying to lay low and not draw any attention to himself. That being said, as his replacement, you are seeming much more pro-town, so perhaps it is good he was replaced.

And yes, I consider voting someone I find to be suspicious pro-town.

As for my suspects, I just did a quick reread of the topic to try to gather my opinions again. Most people seem to be agreeing that itavc is being scummy, and I think I will have to agree as well. Manzcar and Sudai's posts highlighted this fact quite well. As I went back through the topic and reread itavc's posts, each subsequent post seems to get more and more scummy. He started by casting suspicion on me and legomaniac but soon jumped ship and OMGUS voted sam.

To me, it seems as we grow suspicious of itavc, it is shaking his confidence. His posts are overflowing with emotion and he is making threats and such. If you were really town, what would you have to be so afraid of? But he hasn't said anything in a bit, so I want to see his response to some of these newer posts before I vote him.

As for secondary suspicions, I think most we can all agree that legomaniac jumping votes all over is scummy, but I'm not sure whether to think of that as bad play or him being scum yet. I want to see him post some real content soon as well, cause he hasn't really said much of anything of interest.

I also slightly fos Vaya, as I said earlier for reasons I posted in post 124. But this could also be me over-analyzing things, so I'm not too worried about it yet.


IN SUMMARY:
itavc seems scummy, mostly because of his OMGUS vote on sam, and at this current moment I would be in favor of his lynch. I would also be okay with a legomaniac lynch.

Itavc, legomaniac, and evil sonidow all really need to make some new posts with some good content IMO. We hardly even know anything about Evil Sonidow, so I'm interested in seeing how he reacts.



Also, one more thing. Correct me if i'm wrong, but wouldn't it be advantageous for us to lynch on day 1? If so, the deadline is this saturday and so personally, I would like to get alot of this stuff that is hanging around all sorted out by then.
[/b]

You reread a thread and don’t come up with anything other than generalized observations? Recaps of what’s happened? No top scum suspects, nothing you find at all? This is a classic example of “talking a lot but saying nothing.”

I haven’t been able to get as good of a read on his day two posts since I’ve been busy/away/catching up the majority of today, but I’ve noticed quite a bit of words that don’t wrap around a particular point, as if he’s talking in order to contribute or make it seem like he’s not lurking. Here’s a quick example:

Alright, I understand your point a little better now Vaya. From your point of view, it does make sense to lynch your suspect for the other scum, Sam. However, unfortunately, for the rest of us, we should be a little hesitant due to the fact that you could be lying, leading to a near instant town loss. You give us reasons why you would not fake cop, and while I am inclined to believe you are the real cop, it may not be best to follow you necessarily.

Here's what it comes down to I think. If we want to play it safe, to make absolutely sure we won't lose anytime soon, then we want to lynch lego today to see if he is scum and Vaya is really cop. There is a slight chance I suppose that Vaya could be lego's mafia buddy, but it seems very dangerous for Vaya to claim cop with the potential of there being a real cop.

I don’t really like how he’s taking one sentence and turning it into three; it’s like he’s trying to bullshit his way through a college research paper. Except with this I feel he’s trying to bullshit the town into thinking he’s town.


quote tag fixed

[sam.samhorn]

MOD: Can you please fix that last atma quote? I made this in word and forgot to clear the formatting before I posted.

[sam.samhorn]

Once again, I think we should revisit the case against me tomorrow, since it's virtually guaranteed at this point that lego is scum and talking about me tomorrow is probably going to take up the majority of the day.

I just realized something big as I was typing up that last post. I think I discovered who the scum pair are.

I agree with Meji, but keeping my vote for the sake of random voting!!! If Sam has anything to say, it would be appreciated, so we can tell whose scum and who isn't.

Finger of Suspiscion: sam.samhorn

At this point in the game, all he ever did was go around, agreeing with what everyone else says and voting with them. He never had any problem before with changing his random vote. But for some reason, when it came to samhorn, lego suddenly decides he doesn't want to jump around with his vote anymore. This is because he didn't want to place a vote on his scumbuddy.

Any comments that are directed at lego's actions I can't comment on because I'm not lego. I'll just skip those points in your accusations.

You are scummy. I will vote you once GOTOR posts something or he gets replaced.

I think I realize what he might have been doing with this post. If samhorn provided reasons that he thought itacv2 was scummy, he probably would have just argued the points instead of getting so upset about the reasonless accusations. I think he purposely accuses itacv2 of being scummy without explaining why in order to get a bad reaction out of him and make him look scummy to everyone else. He was probably trying to help his scumbuddy out by getting one of his attackers lynched.

That's a fair point, but wrong; throughout my mafia career, I've always made posts, as town or scum, that make blanket statements "X is scummy," "Y is town," before ever explaining the reasoning behind it. Also, don't forget that you agreed yourself Vaya that itacv2 was scummy with that post.

To be fair I was trying to get itacv2 lynched actively but that's because I thought he was scum. Truthfully, I haven't had a good enough read on legomaniac all game and it wasn't until this cop claim that won me over.

I've also realized that all game, samhorn seems to have completely neglected to comment on lego's scummy-looking behavior, or say anything to or about lego for that matter. It's as if he's trying to distance himself from lego.

Something else that I now realize is really odd is his declaration that he figured out who both of the mafia are, itacv2 and atma. I would think that when making such a claim, part of you're reasoning would include their interactions with each other. But when itacv2 flipped town, this didn't seem to affect his belief that atma is scum at all. It seems to me that he must have already known itacv2 was town.

No, I never use interactions between players when building a case on someone, because there are so many ways scum could out-WIFOM town with this that it's ridiculous. I thought atma was scum and I thought itacv2 was scum, that's about it. Don't know what else I'm supposed to say here.

Finally, I've noticed at Day 2, everyone except samhorn has been attacking lego or talking about how scummy he is. I could be wrong, but I don't get the feeling that any of you guys are scum busing your fellow scum, especially atma, who samhorn is accusing of being scum. In fact, samhorn seems to be lurking Day 2. He may simply not be here, but maybe he's been put into a tough spot with everyone suspicious off his scumbuddy and asking for his opinion on things.

Simply because we know lego's scum and we can lynch him any time knowing this, I think we should lynch samhorn first just to be safe.

I didn't get a good read off of lego, simply because he could be confused town just as easily as he could be scum, so I didn't say anything on it. I haven't had a good enough read on him to say anything either way.

Earlier during Day 2 though you can be assured that I was busy/gone and wasn't checking the thread though.

[sam.samhorn]

Fair enough, I can't expect you to address such points. But the fact still remains that lego contradicted his usual behavior to avoid voting for you, and that's still a point against you, whether you can be expected to argue it or not.

Hey I never said this case wasn't legitimate. I just can't defend myself here in this regard.

If you say that's how you usually play, I guess I'll trust you on that one. Still, it's odd that trying to get itacv2 lynched is just about the only action you've taken in this game thus far, and its an action that really benefited scum(particularly lego). Your accusations probably caused lego's lynch to be delayed a day, by taking pressure away from him and putting it on his attacker.

You say that you thought itacv2 was scum, based off of what? Going by what you said earlier(post 202), at the point you first said he was scummy, all that he said that bothered you was that he was willing to back down if given a good reason. I get why you thought it was scummy, but I don't see why it was more worth commenting on than lego's behavior. I don't see why you would just give lego the benefit of the doubt that his scummy behavior may have been the result of being an inexperienced, confused townie and that it wasn't worth commenting on, but you immediately go after itacv2 for his single comment.

That comment to me implicated him as scum in my eyes -- I ended up being wrong. Meanwhile lego didn't do anything to me to implicate him as scum or town in my eyes because I was waivering on him being town or scum and therefore had no comment.

That's really the only defense I have -- I feel like I'm stuck in an unfortunate situation here.

This really bothers me. You're the IC of this game, isn't it your job here to help out newbies? If you thought lego might have simply been a confused townie, why didn't you say anything to him about how scummy he was making himself look?

I find it suspicious that, with as much attention as he's been getting, you didn't find anything about him worth commenting on at all.

I don't feel as if my job is to 'guide' the newbies to an optimal mafiascum playstyle, since my playstyle tends to be different than what mafia theory and the wiki tell me I should coach you as. I'm exposing you to a different playstyle than what's expected in an IC in a newbie game, because when you start playing larger theme games, you'll run into more eccentric players like myself and you should be prepared for those players as well.

Of course getting the more formulaic players is a valuable experience in and of itself but I'm assuming you'll play more than one newbie game.

Now with that said, I don't think it's my job to guide everyone on how you should or shouldn't be playing. If I had any sort of inkling that lego was in fact a confused, newbie townie -- which I didn't, I've said numerous times that I was totally on the fence about whether or not he was townie or scum -- I would have said something about it. Unfortunately I felt itascv was the scummier player, and I acted on it that way.

[sam.samhorn]

This should answer atma's question as well.

So, when you're not sure whether or not someone is scum, you usually don't bother commenting on them? I don't get then why itacv2's one comment, which easily could have been that of a townie who simply didn't have too much faith in his case, made you sure enough that he may have been scum that you would call him scummy. But lego, who wasn't even attempting to scumhunt or even bring forth any original thoughts of his own, wasn't even worth commenting on?

It's not an exact science, it's a gut feeling. They gave off different vibes to me. It looked to me like itascv was hiding something and legomaniac was just blurting things out very stream-of-consciousness style.

But back to your earlier point, no, I don't usually bother commenting on them. I haven't commented on you, for example. I prefer to keep mental notes on players to myself so that I can pull material out and make a case on someone without them having time to adjust or react to it. For example, if I blurted out in the middle of day one, "Vaya, I think that post might have had some scum motives, I'm going to keep my eye on you," I'm giving you an opportunity to adjust to that comment and quit doing what makes you scummy.

[sam.samhorn]

But back to your earlier point, no, I don't usually bother commenting on them. I haven't commented on you, for example. I prefer to keep mental notes on players to myself so that I can pull material out and make a case on someone without them having time to adjust or react to it. For example, if I blurted out in the middle of day one, "Vaya, I think that post might have had some scum motives, I'm going to keep my eye on you," I'm giving you an opportunity to adjust to that comment and quit doing what makes you scummy.

Could you explain to me how this isn't just what you did with itacv2?

I thought itscv2 was mafia.

[sam.samhorn]

IMO, we should have kept the crux of this discussion until tomorrow anyways. Let's hammer lego.

[sam.samhorn]

Sudai is actually looking like a suspect, almost as much as as atma is.

[sam.samhorn]

Sam you have the habit of throwing out accusations wihout why you suspect them.
What makes you think Sudai is a good suspect?

Manzcar, I know I do that. I've done that in virtually every game I've ever played with this account as well as my other account (Quagmire).

Sudai is suspicious because he drifted through yesterday without saying much and hopped on the lego bandwagon when it became painstakingly obvious that he was the lynch candidate for today.

Sam your case on itvac was weak at best. It mostly centered around that he was attacking Lego who is known scum and his inability to aritculate simply. You didn't even give reasons for why he was scummy until pressed at the end of the day. And even then some of the reasons you gave were things said after you made the "your scummy" comment. Ivac made a comment that you were trying to get the attention off of you and put on him. You retorted that yes that is what happened but at the time there was no real attention on either of you, but itvac was putting all kinds of pressure on Lego and attention was falling on him directly. Your comment on him being scum pulled all attention off of Lego and put it on itvac who had a mini melt down and said some stuff that was taken as scummy. Mission accomplished. In fact you stayed very far away from Lego until the cop claimed a guilty on him. At that time he was doomed but when attention was thrown at you you wanted to get to the nigt as soon as possible.

Look, this case on me is totally legitimate here. I did attempt to divert attention away from lego because I didn't think he was the lynch candidate that day and I got stronger scum vibes from itacv2. I stand by that line of reasoning day one, it just turns out I was ass-backwards and totally wrong. Sometimes I read people correctly and sometimes I don't -- that's really the only defense I can give you here.

I clearly see an attempt to not throw attention on Lego. Get attention on others. You found itvac scummy on less evidence than what was out there on Lego. Sam I find you scummy

vote Sam

It was more of an attempt to throw attention away from lego. I still don't think the day one case on lego was totally legit... I thought it was just as plausible that lego, during day one, could have been a newbie town not necessarily knowing how to play other than a scumbag. That's why my read on him was neutral; I didn't have a good enough read on him to be convinced either way.

In any case though this is a fair case on me, and I can't really come up with any other defense than what I've said already and that's also not WIFOM.

[sam.samhorn]

Like I said before, I'm busy with school but I found sometime to post now.

I was trusting Vaya as he posted his theory and cop claimed, and specially now that it was confirmed to be trusted. As such, I decided to go with what he had previously said (and Manzcar says) of

Voting Sam.

It's strange that he thinks there's a 'valid case' against him. No citizen should think there are valid cases agaisnt them.

You're a good idea for a lynch tomorrow, if I'm lynched.

My top suspect is still Sudai... although I suspect I'm not going to last through the end of this day.

[sam.samhorn]

I don't know how I can have any input here without looking scummy, but I will say that lego seemed like a fairly new player himself -- a sort of Charlie "Wild Card" player from Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

My top suspect is Sudai... I'm going to reread Manzcar to see if I can come up with anything as well.

[sam.samhorn]

I realized that Lego's words could easily be WIFOM, but as sam said, lego was obviously a new player and I'm not convinced he would think to say such wifom. Though I suppose basing the entirety of anything off of his words would be foolish. Especially because sam continues to seem scummy to me.

See, that's why I never suspected lego of anything on day one in the first place. Everyone thought he was scummy, but I couldn't tell if he had scum motivations or was just being newish.

[sam.samhorn]

Any one else wanna back an Evil Sonidow lynch with me? He votes me based on a false accusation and then says I just seem strange without providing any evidence of such a claim.

Yeah. Otherwise I die, and I'm a townie.

unvote, vote Evil Sonidow

[sam.samhorn]

atma remember if Sodinow isn't scum then I'm voting for you tomorrow.

[sam.samhorn]

Here you go Manzcar.

Alright sorry this took so long. I haven’t had any kind of detailed post in forever.

Here, way back in day one, is what originally piqued my interest in atma:

vote GOTOR13

clearly, GOTOR won't be contributing anything and it seems weird that he would bother to stop by but not say anything remotely useful. so I would be okay with this lynch.

But, also I would like to FOS Vaya, his last few posts just don't go over well with me, one is him using someone else's reasoning for his own vote without adding anything. Also, he was defending legomaniac, which seems odd. I'm pretty sure legomaniac can defend himself, just seems odd.

This post in and of itself didn’t seem too harmless but I made a mental note to watch where atma would go with his vote of GOTOR. There was a difference in reasoning between when I voted for GOTOR and why atma did; mine was a clear policy vote because GOTOR didn’t seem interested in participating at all and I voted him with the message “either post or get replaced, please.”

Atma seemingly used hit vote on GOTOR as a legitimate post for lurking, which I’ve never bought into. So I kept watch. Here’s what came after:

why would you not want to lynch gotor13 just cause he might be replaced? fact of the matter is, you base your vote off how someone is currently, not a future possibility. its just not logical to think like that.

I understand what are you saying but consider this: lurking is sometimes considered to be scummy, so what if GOTOR was lurking but covering it by saying he was busy and away etc.? that was my point. but it was made sort of a moot point when mr. moderator just told us he is going to be replaced soon. eh.

Later he admitted that he didn’t know GOTOR was just inactive and vanished out of nowhere and unvoted him. But his reasons for voting him seemed really scummy-opportunistic, as he fruitfully attacked a lurker and tried to use it as a legitimate case.

What really got me was this post though:

First of all,

Unvote GOTOR13/Manzcar

Now that he has been replaced, no reason for my vote to be on him at the moment.

Atma why do you want to lynch a lurker? Do you think this is pro town? Who is your top suspect and why?

As I tried to explain in a previous post, it wasn't so much the fact that he was lurking, but more the fact that he dropped by to say he was around and almost immediately turned around and said he was leaving, without providing even a single tiny snippet of content. To me, it just seemed like he was trying to lay low and not draw any attention to himself. That being said, as his replacement, you are seeming much more pro-town, so perhaps it is good he was replaced.

And yes, I consider voting someone I find to be suspicious pro-town.

As for my suspects, I just did a quick reread of the topic to try to gather my opinions again. Most people seem to be agreeing that itavc is being scummy, and I think I will have to agree as well. Manzcar and Sudai's posts highlighted this fact quite well. As I went back through the topic and reread itavc's posts, each subsequent post seems to get more and more scummy. He started by casting suspicion on me and legomaniac but soon jumped ship and OMGUS voted sam.

To me, it seems as we grow suspicious of itavc, it is shaking his confidence. His posts are overflowing with emotion and he is making threats and such. If you were really town, what would you have to be so afraid of? But he hasn't said anything in a bit, so I want to see his response to some of these newer posts before I vote him.

As for secondary suspicions, I think most we can all agree that legomaniac jumping votes all over is scummy, but I'm not sure whether to think of that as bad play or him being scum yet. I want to see him post some real content soon as well, cause he hasn't really said much of anything of interest.

I also slightly fos Vaya, as I said earlier for reasons I posted in post 124. But this could also be me over-analyzing things, so I'm not too worried about it yet.


IN SUMMARY:
itavc seems scummy, mostly because of his OMGUS vote on sam, and at this current moment I would be in favor of his lynch. I would also be okay with a legomaniac lynch.

Itavc, legomaniac, and evil sonidow all really need to make some new posts with some good content IMO. We hardly even know anything about Evil Sonidow, so I'm interested in seeing how he reacts.



Also, one more thing. Correct me if i'm wrong, but wouldn't it be advantageous for us to lynch on day 1? If so, the deadline is this saturday and so personally, I would like to get alot of this stuff that is hanging around all sorted out by then.
[/b]

You reread a thread and don’t come up with anything other than generalized observations? Recaps of what’s happened? No top scum suspects, nothing you find at all? This is a classic example of “talking a lot but saying nothing.”

I haven’t been able to get as good of a read on his day two posts since I’ve been busy/away/catching up the majority of today, but I’ve noticed quite a bit of words that don’t wrap around a particular point, as if he’s talking in order to contribute or make it seem like he’s not lurking. Here’s a quick example:

Alright, I understand your point a little better now Vaya. From your point of view, it does make sense to lynch your suspect for the other scum, Sam. However, unfortunately, for the rest of us, we should be a little hesitant due to the fact that you could be lying, leading to a near instant town loss. You give us reasons why you would not fake cop, and while I am inclined to believe you are the real cop, it may not be best to follow you necessarily.

Here's what it comes down to I think. If we want to play it safe, to make absolutely sure we won't lose anytime soon, then we want to lynch lego today to see if he is scum and Vaya is really cop. There is a slight chance I suppose that Vaya could be lego's mafia buddy, but it seems very dangerous for Vaya to claim cop with the potential of there being a real cop.

I don’t really like how he’s taking one sentence and turning it into three; it’s like he’s trying to bullshit his way through a college research paper. Except with this I feel he’s trying to bullshit the town into thinking he’s town.


quote tag fixed

[sam.samhorn]

As I tried to explain, me and Sam both expressed our suspicion of Sudai. Thus, it seemed like it would be in the mafia's favor to keep Sudai alive as me and sam were leaning towards him being mafia. Also, personally at least, I've found you to be fairly pro town, at least more so than Sam or Sudai. Make sense?

Actually... this is a good question.

I'm actually starting to think Evil is scum. If I'm thinking from his POV, I'd kill Sudai without a doubt because that leaves two people who are attacking each other (atma, you and I) alive and when/if we voted for each other Evil could just swoop in with a kill. He's drifted along without attention so far this entire game and it makes perfect sense for him to be mafia here.

Since discussion is stalling and going nowhere I'm going to act on this very recklessly.

Vote: Evil Sodinow

. atma you can put in the lynching vote if you're scum and if so good game.

[sam.samhorn]

SAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM come out to plaaaaaaaaaay

I keep forgetting about this game since it's on my alt's account and not my main one

[sam.samhorn]

As I tried to explain, me and Sam both expressed our suspicion of Sudai. Thus, it seemed like it would be in the mafia's favor to keep Sudai alive as me and sam were leaning towards him being mafia. Also, personally at least, I've found you to be fairly pro town, at least more so than Sam or Sudai. Make sense?

Actually... this is a good question.

I'm actually starting to think Evil is scum. If I'm thinking from his POV, I'd kill Sudai without a doubt because that leaves two people who are attacking each other (atma, you and I) alive and when/if we voted for each other Evil could just swoop in with a kill. He's drifted along without attention so far this entire game and it makes perfect sense for him to be mafia here.

Since discussion is stalling and going nowhere I'm going to act on this very recklessly.

Vote: Evil Sodinow

. atma you can put in the lynching vote if you're scum and if so good game.

Replace 'Evil Sodinow' with 'Manzcar' and my post should make sense now.

unvote
vote Manzcar

[sam.samhorn]

bad choice sam please unvote now unless you are scum that is.

I am not scum, but I'm going to act on my suspicions and killing Sudai logically only makes sense for you to kill him.

[sam.samhorn]

or the scum to set up me on the final day to get you to vote for me.

Man if you are not scum you just cost town the game.

what a waste.

I really don't think atma would do this gambit since I appeared to be dead set on him (or Sudai) at the end of yesterday.

[sam.samhorn]

Damn. I had an inkling at the end of the game and it just happened to trump everything atma's done so far.

<--- LVP

[sam.samhorn]

atma did during the game*

[sam.samhorn]

Good game atma. Well played everyone