Mini 848 - Second String Muppets Mafia - Game Over.

[MonkeyMan576]

/confirm

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: The Incredible Hulk

, rather

From time to time I may accidently post in my alt, which is used exlusively for running my munchkin league in the mish mash forum. I'll try to keep this as little as possible, I know it's annoying.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote:
Vote: ~Jordan

Wagons are a good thing. Ending the RVS early is a good thing.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote:
Vote: ~Jordan

Making sure it's bolded...

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote:

Vote: ~Jordan

Wagons are a good thing. Ending the RVS early is a good thing.

Why did you random vote initially? Jordan would be an obvious target for a non-random vote.[/quote]

Didn't see the post, obviously, but posting the obvious can be a good way for scum to avoid attention, also.

[MonkeyMan576]

SL, you need to clarify like now. Does PR mean post restriction or power role? Do you have an anti-town role or anti-town power?

Kirby and Monkey, why did you not comment on SL and her softclaim?

Because I take a cautious approach to making attacks early in day 1. I find exaggerating what happens early in the day often leads to mislynches. Also I've been trying to determine the motives for the softclaim, the whole scenario seems a little strange to me.

[MonkeyMan576]

l

I'm a habitual spammer.

..but now its Daytime, and I promise to help you kill scum, however may it be done. But killing me is not killing scum or neutral or whatever you people can come up with that you think will help you advancement.

What does this mean, you don't like to contribute?

[MonkeyMan576]

Because people often take things out of context on day 1 and are quick to assumptions, and like I said, prone to exaggeration.

The rush for information and to appear pro-town often leads to mistakes. People often don't realize the advantage a successfull day 1 lynch can have or how badly a mislynch can hurt the town.

So I like to observe as much as attack early in the game.[/

quote]

And I like to start it.

My random vote (dont even remember who it was for), was to trigger the reaction which would occur. I hate it when its too strong, but note that I am new to this thing, though thats a moot excuse.

Now, for the question:

Kirbyoshi seems strange to me, as well as monkeyman.

eKim seem good, asking for facts.

Malcolm and the other, I can't guess, due to bias. (they voted 4 me just4that :[ )

Gee, OMGUS much? I vote you and you finger me back? Without an explanation except that I seem "strange"?

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: MonkeyMan

. Jordan is directly answering a question about the people on his wagon. That's not OMGUS. I agree that Jordan should add more on why you and Kirby are "strange", but your calling this OMGUS is scummy.

Just because you're answering a question doesn't mean it obsolves you of having to provide examples. And I don't think the question was directed on the wagonee so much as those who might be less biased.

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: MonkeyMan

. Jordan is directly answering a question about the people on his wagon. That's not OMGUS. I agree that Jordan should add more on why you and Kirby are "strange", but your calling this OMGUS is scummy.

Just because you're answering a question doesn't mean it obsolves you of having to provide examples. And I don't think the question was directed on the wagonee so much as those who might be less biased.

You have the right to actively defend yourself by demanding an explanation for 'strange', but MCL is right, it wasn't OMGUS. His basis for vote on you also has merit as you seem to be making Jordan's assessment of you out to be a scummy attack, when it was a response to a direct question. That is a bit of a derived method of building a case that a wagon of 5 would seem to demand.

I voted early in the wagon pretty much for the sole purposes of wagoning and eliciting a responce. The wagon wasn't at 5 when I voted.

That being said, I don't think Jordan has helped his cause since the wagon started. Laying hints to his role in his random vote. Trying to defend future behavior by saying he's a "spammer". Then what I feel is an OMGUS, and (so far) pointing fingers without providing examples. Wagoning is a perfectly valid early game strategy, even without an extensive case, as it can be useful in
provoking reactions and catching scum, but, as said above, I think there are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of Jordan at this point.

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt

[MonkeyMan576]

Look right here. He is reluctant to touch Spring's softclaim because he's trying to determine the motives for it. Really? Then what makes Jordan's any different?

Monkey wasn't sure that it was a softclaim and wanted Jordan's response to gauge whether he did or not

. Wait a second, I thought he was cautious and tries to figure these things out? And it isn't as though the "bad luck" topic wasn't already broached to Jordan by me and responded to by him. Yet "cautious" Monkey needs to route out a softclaim? I thought he found that exaggeration leads to mislynches? Calling Jordan's first statement a softclaim isn't an exaggeration?

Monkey needs to be lynched.

Ecto is clearly reaching here and upset that he has been connected to Jordan. He is not defending himself, but choosing to attack me with what is essentially a psychoanalytical case, not any case based in strong logic. Note that he completely ignores the Jordan wagon, suggesting that his "case" on me is stronger than what's already been presented against Jordan, which is based on several observations, not just a weak psychoanalytical presumption. I never said I was cautious in everything, I said it was important to balance observation and attack, rather than just recklessly attack, especially once you have been targeted(which is essentially what Ecto is doing).

[MonkeyMan576]

Clarification: PR means Power Role.
I'm clearly town aligned.
I'm not answering to any other role related question since with those clarification my last post should be clear enough for now.

I have other comments at this point but I'm choosing to let this game stew for 24 more hours.

How are you "clearly town aligned?"

Doese claiming power role automatically mean you are telling the truth? Why are you afraid of people asking questions, do you have something to hide?

FOS: springlullaby

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm feeling good about the Monkey-wagon. Ecto's catch of being cautious with respect to SL while not being cautious with respect to Jordan is a good one.

However, the following is ridiculous:

P.S. - I believe that posting under your alt repeatedly in this game is your method of making it difficult to analyze and follow the thread of your posts. You might make an actual effort at logging in under the name you are playing this game under.

That's a massive stretch. Occam's Razor suggests that not re-logging in under the correct name is an easy and innocent mistake to make. That is, I can't read it as anything but null and it tweaks my scum-dar a bit by saying it's not null.

I don't have a double standard. When I suggested caution, I was explaining my overall approach, not a case by case basis. I'm more aggressive on Jordan because I find him scummier. The whole case against me seems to be based on faulty psychoanalysis.

[MonkeyMan576]

Clarification: PR means Power Role.
I'm clearly town aligned.
I'm not answering to any other role related question since with those clarification my last post should be clear enough for now.

I have other comments at this point but I'm choosing to let this game stew for 24 more hours.

How are you "clearly town aligned?"

Doese claiming power role automatically mean you are telling the truth? Why are you afraid of people asking questions, do you have something to hide?

FOS: springlullaby

I believe that Spring is saying there is no ambiguity in her alignment, but from her initial post we can assume her role is somewhat unusual and she is possibly at issue on how exactly to use it. Take it as an explanation that something odd may happen and she may be at the cause. We can take it as scum setting something up from the get go, or town warning us of a consequence of her actions to help avoid confusion later.

Take it as scummy, or take it as neutral. Ask Spring about something else, but I think we've heard enough about the role.

She's the one that brought it up. It seems disingenuine to softclaim and then criticize those that are suspicious. I'm not calling for her lynch, or asking for more role info, just an explanation of her actions.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm feeling good about the Monkey-wagon. Ecto's catch of being cautious with respect to SL while not being cautious with respect to Jordan is a good one.

However, the following is ridiculous:

P.S. - I believe that posting under your alt repeatedly in this game is your method of making it difficult to analyze and follow the thread of your posts. You might make an actual effort at logging in under the name you are playing this game under.

That's a massive stretch. Occam's Razor suggests that not re-logging in under the correct name is an easy and innocent mistake to make. That is, I can't read it as anything but null and it tweaks my scum-dar a bit by saying it's not null.

I believe that the first time was an honest accident. I believe that subsequent incidents are deliberate sloppiness once he realized the effect it would have.

That's a pretty strong accusation. I would rather my alt not be the focus of discussion, because it is not intentional. It seems to me that you are trying to focus attention off of your own actual in game behavior.

[MonkeyMan576]

This is getting rediculous. Ecto and Jordan have been defending each other and attacking in tandem the entire day.

[MonkeyMan576]

Heh, well I've seen no discussion of my in-game behavior, so it would be rather difficult to take discussion off of it hey? It was not I that brought your alt into the game in the first place. You logged it in and posted. At the very least, by my bringing up the topic, you might make a real effort to login under one name now mightn't you?

I didn't see Spring criticize anyone after the softclaim. She said she wouldn't answer anymore role related questions. I don't see how you can say asking her why she softclaimed isn't pursuing the role itself when it is clear that the function of the role itself is what made her mention it in the first place.

Except no one was asking any more role related questions, and it seems the statement was more like an excuse not to answer any kind of questions. It's pretty easy to group nearly any kind of question into role-related if you are determined to do so. I'm supspicious of those that try to restrict scum hunting.

[MonkeyMan576]

This is getting rediculous. Ecto and Jordan have been defending each other and attacking in tandem the entire day.

While functionally you may see no difference, attacking your attacks on Jordan is not the same as defending Jordan. The closest I have come to defending Jordan is to say that as a newer player he is more likely to be inclined to breadcrumb or 'softclaim' a role, meaning his action there at worst would be a null tell, if indeed it was a softclaim at all.

Even if you are not heavily defending Jordan, what you have defended him on, what he has defended you on, your cooperative attacks, your failure to defend an entire case, and the poor logic of your attacks lend me to believe that you are scumbuddies.

[MonkeyMan576]

While functionally you may see no difference, attacking your attacks on Jordan is not the same as defending Jordan.

Functionally

there is no difference, and functionality is what really matters, imo. Maybe you're being a little too careful that you don't defend him directly, but how is that less scummy than defending him indirectly?

Excuse me? Are you trying to say that attacking Monkey through his case points on Jordan is scummy and that by doing so, you can only be defending Jordan and in a scummy manner at that? You are stretching as far as you can on that one, both of you.

What I'm saying(I can't speak for Kirb) is that if Jordan is scum, he may have made a rookie mistake by fingering Kirb and I, two people he knew were town(in a hypothetical Jordan-scum scenario) and that had already voted for him. Furthermore, the undeniable connections between you and Jordan at this point gives the town the possibility to catch two scum right off the bat, wheras the case against Kirb and I is very weak.

[MonkeyMan576]

Dodging.
That's a lot of gibberish that doesn't address the point and makes up some new things while at it. How does that even begin to address whether attacking a point in someone's case against another player is scummy? . Where did you even come close to saying that Jordan is possibly newbie scum and as newbie scum would be more likely to pick two town players, you and Kirby? (I can point to MD to demonstrate where he was already warned about avoiding casting suspicion on his partners) Where have you shown where Jordan is more likely be newbie scum than newbie town to even begin looking for scum buddies? And in fact, isn't this scum buddy accusation nothing more than OMGUS distraction to keep from answering to your inconsistent behavior?

Now, you may count this as a defense if you like, but I'll point out yet again that what I've done is dispell the validity of your attacks and explain where the scummy motivations in your actions are evident. An Ecto/Jordan connection, other than that fact, is desperate fabrication on your part.

I'm not dodging anything, and it's not making things up. It's called case building. And what you're doing is strawmanning. You're failing to argue against my entire case and trying to nitpick against one or two parts of it in case someone wants to join your wagon. My case is hardly desperate or fabrication, every time you defend Jordan, especially in your strawmanning, weak argument fashion, you are digging yourself a deeper hole.

As far as the newbie scum argument, I've already presented my case against him, and the combined scumminess of you and him put together strengthens my case.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not sure what I can do to further my case on scum-ecto and scum-Jordan, I think I've presented a fairly strong case. It may not have been strong in the beginning, but I think their behavior since then has reinforced my case. I think it would be a good idea for those of us voting for Ecto or Jordan decided on one wagon. If we get to a point of 5 on the wagon(L-2) I don't think it would be unreasonable to ask for a roleclaim.

[MonkeyMan576]

I think I've presented a fairly strong case. It may not have been strong in the beginning, but I think their behavior since then has reinforced my case.

This is a real gem. You admit your case isn't strong, and assert anyway that Ecto and Jordan just must be buddies; after all, why would a townie disagree with a weak case like that? That's an... interesting... thought process to go through.

I didn't say my case wasn't strong, I said it wasn't strong in the beginning. The more I heard from the two, the more it reinforced my case. And Jordan never disagreed with my case, he just said I was "strange" without giving any explanation. He's still lurking.

And the stage of the day has no bearing on weather someone should be asked to roleclaim or not. The debate between ecto and I has been fairly intense, and I don't think both sides have been presented and there's not a whole lot more to be gained by excessive debate. That being said, I'm always willing to listen to opinions, but I don't see a whole lot of people offering anything new.

[MonkeyMan576]

EBWOP: I think both sides have been presented.

[MonkeyMan576]

I think it would be a good idea for those of us voting for Ecto or Jordan decided on one wagon. If we get to a point of 5 on the wagon(L-2) I don't think it would be unreasonable to ask for a roleclaim.

It looks extremely scummy to me that you're levying the choice of which one to consolidate votes on to others rather than making the suggestion yourself, it certainly sets you up for a nice position on Day Two if whichever one you consolidate on turns up pro-town -- gives you someone else to blame.

Especially when my formal logic post at the bottom of page four has outlined, fairly clearly, based on your reasoning which one to choose.

I'm happy with my vote.

That's not what I'm doing at all. What's with all the psychoanalyzing? I have actual semi-hard evidence of a connection between two players and people are coming up with all this fluff stuff.

That being said, I'm not suggesting your logic in wrong, merely suggesting that consolidating on jordon or ecto would bring a better result.

[MonkeyMan576]

1. Fair enough. It's still not the most beneficial style in terms of the town.
3. That should be all that matters when you have this little to go on.
4. Not one that would provoke any meaningful discussion or give any decent evidence as to my alignment

Your reasoning, at this point, simply does not make sense in any scenario other than both players being scum. It is my suggestion that you consolidate on Jordan, should you choose one, however I still feel Monkey is the best choice for D1 at this point.

Regardless, Ecto/

Jordan

/Monkey are all lynches I would be okay with if we were to hit the deadline right now seeing how as none of the cases are particularly strong. Still, given the choice I'd take Monkey over Jordan over Ecto.

If you don't think the cases are very strong, why don't you try to find your own scum, rather than lynch those that are willing to put themselves on a limb trying?

[MonkeyMan576]

I should have said earlier---saying that L-2 is a good place to ask for a roleclaim is anti-town. A claim should be requested when someone is ready to drop the hammer. Forcing claims too early helps scum.

I disagree, L-1 gives scum the opportunity to drop the hammer before the roleclaim, so L-2 is the more ideal time.

[MonkeyMan576]

Why would giving scum an opportunity to be at a defined position on a wagon be a bad idea? Still, I don't think that requesting at L-2 is what is scummy. Here's what might be scummy Monkey, you actually were after an L-4 claim. You were appealing to players on one wagon to join another for the sole purpose of forcing a claim. Well, you only had an L-4 case. You need to

build

to an L-2 case to ask for the claim. That's what I think is the issue.

That's why I said the roleclaim was conditional on being at L-2. I never said RC right now. I've pushed for the Ecto/Jordan voters to consolidate for awhile now. Jordan seems to be the better choice, and I continue that assesment.

[MonkeyMan576]

I believe that Monkey and myself are the parties involved and we are asking you for your other cases. I really don't think that you want to attempt to argue that we haven't exhausted the argument.

Sooo...you're at each other's throats basically on everything else, yet you come together at this one point? You don't think Monkey could have a scummy motivation for saying EL is simply piggybacking without posting any real suspicions?

Wait a minute...

why don't you try to find your own scum, rather than lynch those that are willing to put themselves on a limb trying?

Monkey's comment to EL seems like a scummy GTFO move, as evidenced above. It sounds like "There's enough people on me. Go find someone else to pick on." Pretty scummy if you ask me.

Unvote Elvis, Vote: MonkeyMan576/MonkeySudo

I guess I'm picking a side now...

That's not what I was saying at all. I'm saying that voting for people that are casebuilding and scumhunting, when you're not willing to build your own cases, is scummy.

[MonkeyMan576]

Jordan seems to be the better choice, and I continue that assessment.

Really? When you posted the "request for consolidation" you did not endorse either lynch in particular, simply that the wagoners come to a consensus. When did you say (since you've been attacking both of them) that you thought Jordan was a better lynch than Ecto?

Right now. I wasn't dodging the question before, more I didn't realize is was something people were demanding an immediate answer to.

[MonkeyMan576]

That's not what I was saying at all. I'm saying that voting for people that are casebuilding and scumhunting, when you're not willing to build your own cases, is scummy.

Does not explain the fact that you, by the post to which I originally referred, attempted to discredit EL's arguments, when he has said time and time again that his arguments are based on sound logic, whilst you have been at least semi-flip-floppy on your cases.

I don't think his case is strong, at least not as strong as mine. He can say his case is based on strong logic all he wants, it doesn't make it fact. The fact is his behavior, being unwilling to attack or stop defending Jordan, and refusing to recognize this, has strengthened my case, wheras I don't see that ecto's argument is anything more than attacking my argument.

[MonkeyMan576]

Right now. I wasn't dodging the question before, more I didn't realize is was something people were demanding an immediate answer to.

Seems to me that it would be obvious that if you ask for consolidation, the person who requests it should be the one to choose the target. You just left it wide open.

Like I said, I didn't see it as a big issue at the time, I saw valid arguments for a Jordan or Ecto lynch, and still do. The case against Jordan is just stronger at this point, since he started the OMGUSing, poor arguing(they're "strange") and the Ecto case revolves around Jordan's original behavior.

[MonkeyMan576]

I was kind of on the same boat as Snix, just waiting for someone to do something that I legitimately identify as scummy. Ecto and Monkey are both definitely still on my radar, but I can't pin them down beyond cases that make way too much inference.

This statement is

entirely

inconsistent with your very recent insistence that we stay focused on the Jordan/Ecto vs Monkey situation. If you were waiting for someone to do something scummy, why were you opposed to getting additional cases that would present that opportunity?

I second this, this, in conjuction with his willingness to lynch scumhunters, gives me enough reason to change my vote for the time being. Not that I'm not still suspicious of Jordan or Ecto(especially Jordan), but the argument has run its course for the time being. I also agree DDD's L-1 vote raises eyebrows.

Unvote:
Vote: Eldrich Lord
Fos: DDD

[MonkeyMan576]

You're very careful with your wording DDD, you weren't just voting, you were setting someone up to be hammered. There is a scary amount of finality and certainty to that given your lack of recent posting.

Of course I'm careful with my wording, it doesn't help me as town or scum to make mistakes of any kind; let alone silly wording errors.

I have no reason not to project the confidence I feel on the matter. It could be WIFOMed to death, but I'd suggest that my willingness to take a hard stance with confidence is a town-tell and that scum are more likely to waffle and try and keep their options open. Certainly when I look back at my scum play that's the primary issue I see.

~~~

I second Ectomancer's facepalm.

I think scum would be more likely to be concerned with wording errors, as they would be more worried about being caught in a fake roleclaim.

Also, it's pretty scummy to be directly promoting your own towniness, it causes one to think that your motives for your actions are not to find scum, but to project towniness.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not dodging anything. I'm willing to answer any questions. I also think looking for obvious connections between two players is a valid form of scum hunting.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry, alt.

[MonkeyMan576]

Link Hogthrob

[MonkeyMan576]

@Jordan: No one should claim vanilla? What if they ARE vanilla? They should lie?

[MonkeyMan576]

He's subscribing to the "I Agree" portion of this poll. The problem with these polls is they ask these questions in a fishbowl. This is the Ocean and there is more to consider when deciding upon a lynch than their claim. Like the state of the rest of the game for instance.

viewtopic.php?t=2872&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0

Well, refusing to claim when asked is usually scummy, and lying as town is definately scummy-looking. My best chance to survive the day as vanilla is to claim vanilla. At least this gives the town the chance to find actual scum. According to Jordan, it would seem, he would favor lynching a vanilla townie than look for scum in this instance.

[MonkeyMan576]

My claim shouldn't save me from a lynch, but the fact that any allegations against me are either untrue or exaggerated should.

[MonkeyMan576]

Not claiming increases your chances of getting lynched, townies getting lynched increases scums chances of winning. Dumb argument. Just because you read something somewhere doesn't make it true.

[MonkeyMan576]

Lol. How does claiming decrease the chances of you getting lynched? You claimed vanilla townie. Any mafia can do that and get away w/ it.
Im not going to read something above this post and consider it true.

Your argument is much dumber

But lets not debate. You did what you did; but it makes no difference in my opinions of you.

If you refuse to claim people will assume you are hiding something, and will presume you to be mafia. They will pull their "claim, or else" shtick, then lynch you, then you are one less townie. Pointless.

[MonkeyMan576]

Nonetheless; the end result is the same, except if u survive, the mafia knows ur plain.

I would argue the extra townie vote outweighs whatever knowledge the mafia would gain.

[MonkeyMan576]

Nonetheless; the end result is the same, except if u survive, the mafia knows ur plain.

I would argue the extra townie vote outweighs whatever knowledge the mafia would gain.

what extra townie vote? As stated: claiming vanilla doesnt protect anyone from being lynched.

Sigh.

I think if I were looking for "protection" I'd claim a power role, but it would be a lie, and subject to counter claim.

[MonkeyMan576]

Nonetheless; the end result is the same, except if u survive, the mafia knows ur plain.

I would argue the extra townie vote outweighs whatever knowledge the mafia would gain.

what extra townie vote? As stated: claiming vanilla doesnt protect anyone from being lynched.

Sigh.

I think if I were looking for "protection" I'd claim a power role, but it would be a lie, and subject to counter claim.

so you want to be lynched? Sigh. I'm getting nothing from this convo.

No, you want me to be lynched, regardless of my alignment, obviously.

[MonkeyMan576]

Nonetheless; the end result is the same, except if u survive, the mafia knows ur plain.

I would argue the extra townie vote outweighs whatever knowledge the mafia would gain.

what extra townie vote? As stated: claiming vanilla doesnt protect anyone from being lynched.

Sigh.

I think if I were looking for "protection" I'd claim a power role, but it would be a lie, and subject to counter claim.

I would like a valid attack, you could attack me for claiming vanilla, you could attack me for not claiming vanilla, it's a null tell. Trying to push a illogical attack, however...

so you want to be lynched? Sigh. I'm getting nothing from this convo.

No, you want me to be lynched, regardless of my alignment, obviously.

sigh. That's poppycock. You truly believe you're making sense? So far, uve misunderstood everything ive said to come up with a faux defense.

I want something valid. Is that so much to ask?

[MonkeyMan576]

I would like a valid attack, you could attack me for claiming vanilla, you could attack me for not claiming when asked. It's a null tell. Pushing an illogical attack, however...

[MonkeyMan576]

sigh. I'm not pushing anything. Just saying it was wrong to claim vanilla. Done. k?

I am not convinced u are town and so my vote stays. This debate over strategy isnt very beneficial or meaningful.

And I'm saying it's not wrong to claim vanilla, and you seem to be in the minority on the matter. You haven't answered how the mafia gaining information outweighs the town possibility losing a vote(mine) if I'm lynched. The truth is you are pushing a scummy case.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sigh. You would be lynched either way. CLAIMING ROLE MEANS NOTHING.

did i not say, drop the ****ing thing?

Okay, let it be noted that Jordan doesn't want discussion, and only wants to pull the noose.

[MonkeyMan576]

And I disagree I would "be lynched either way", most players will avoid lynching a potential townie when given a chance. Just because I have the most votes at the moment doesn't make my lynching inevitable.

[MonkeyMan576]

And I disagree I would "be lynched either way", most players will avoid lynching a potential townie when given a chance. Just because I have the most votes at the moment doesn't make my lynching inevitable.

agreed. But claiming vanilla doesnt make a difference. Why are you attacking me simply for questioning a role claim?

Because it seems like you are trying to stop your wagon and push mine, without regard to the logic you are using. You said claiming vanilla was a scum tell, and now you are saying it doesn't stop a lynch. Backtracking, much?

[MonkeyMan576]

Right now I'm a little hesitant to vote Kirby because Jordan fingered him early, and I'm more inclined to think Jordan is scum than Kirby, but charter's case is well reasoned, so for now...

FOS: Kirbyoshi

[MonkeyMan576]

The only thing I saw in terms of Jordan talking about Kirby was "Kirbyoshi seems strange to me" in post 48. Is that what's keeping you from voting Kirby, or am I missing something?

Why do you think Jordan is scum again? I'm pretty sure he isn't scum. Ecto and Kirby look pretty buddybuddy to me. Something I think I missed in my first go I just now noticed, Ecto only votes after EK calls him out for not voting. Could have done it much sooner but didn't. Doesn't seem very town to me.

*Early roleclaiming
*Defending "spamming" behavior
*Early OMGUS
*Voting without reasoning("strange" statement)
*Buddying with Ecto
*Putting me at L-1(another OMGUS)
*Argument that claiming vanilla is scum
*Backtracking

[MonkeyMan576]

@charter: I'm not generally one to bite the hand that feeds me, but first you say I'm obvtown, and then you say all vanilla claims should be lynched. Which is it?

[MonkeyMan576]

Kirbyoshi gets -1 points for failing to use any of the phrases "blatant(ly)", "ham-handed", "brazen", or "unabashedly" in his post.

Since DDD refuses to answer his accusations, and he was over-promoting himself early as obvtown, I'm inclined to,

Unvote:
Vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

[MonkeyMan576]

I guess you're just too clever for me then, I don't see it.

[MonkeyMan576]

Think of the post as a more verbose version of "duh". I was clearly and obviously buddying with charter.

I think it's a valid point, at least worthy of discussion.

[MonkeyMan576]

There's a difference between saying something is a "scumtell" and suspicious, and you haven't addressed the accusations of over-promoting your towniness.

[MonkeyMan576]

Of course I'm careful with my wording, it doesn't help me as town or scum to make mistakes of any kind; let alone silly wording errors.

I have no reason not to project the confidence I feel on the matter. It could be WIFOMed to death, but

I'd suggest that my willingness to take a hard stance with confidence is a town-tell and that scum are more likely to waffle and try and keep their options open

. Certainly when I look back at my scum play that's the primary issue I see.

[MonkeyMan576]

Hang on, I just noticed something...

Well if you're being honest about your role that's phenomenal for us. I've really disliked Jordan's attack on MM lately and MM has been calm and rational about the whole deal. I've got a lot of respect for you charter and you raise some really good points about Kirby so...

Unvote; Vote: Kirbyoshi

This, especially the last sentence. Most of charter's case against me is bullcrap, yet you say he "raises really good points". This is more buddying-esque than anything anyone charter accused of it has done, and Monkey's been defending himself well enough recently, so...

Unvote Monkey, Vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

I'm also interested in what in charter's case he found to be "really good points", though I think there is plenty of case to be made against you.

Monkey, do you find it surprising that charter played up to you so hard in his assessments? Go read back and notice he didn't mention you

once

until he comes out with this "Monkey is obvtown" statement. Where did he come up with this? He never mentioned you or your case up to this time except maybe to reference the case as a means to accuse someone of being scummy.
Now go read his post again and tell me if it looks to you like he went into this with a "Monkey is town" disposition. How would he know your alignment so assuredly that his entire post was centered around the assumption that you are town? You'll notice he did this without providing a single comment in support of this idea, either in support of your comments, or in opposition to the details of the case against you.

This is a valid observation. He said that he was going to present his case later on but never did, at least not yet. I assumed he was also going to explain how I was obvtown. Overpromoting someone else as obvtown can be as suspicious as overpromoting yourself, and I'm wondering about his motivations for suddenly coming to my defence. At first I was just gracious not to be on L-1 anymore, but looking at things a bit more objectively it looks a bit odd.

[MonkeyMan576]

There's a difference between saying something is a "scumtell" and suspicious, and you haven't addressed the accusations of over-promoting your towniness.

I said something I believe to be true, certainly true for my play, so no issues there. And I don't believe that trying to show off town credentials is a scumtell either, both town and scum want to be percieved as such, hence not a scumtell.

Actually, scum are more concerned about player perceptions and town are more worried about finding scum. I would argue saying you are obvtown when you are not is a scumtell.

[MonkeyMan576]

There's a difference between saying something is a "scumtell" and suspicious, and you haven't addressed the accusations of over-promoting your towniness.

I said something I believe to be true, certainly true for my play, so no issues there. And I don't believe that trying to show off town credentials is a scumtell either, both town and scum want to be percieved as such, hence not a scumtell.

Actually, scum are more concerned about player perceptions and town are more worried about finding scum. I would argue saying you are obvtown when you are not is a scumtell.

Not being concerned about self-image is the way [insult redacted] get themselves run up to L-1 on Day One. As town it's bad to get lynched or even run up to L-1, hence controlling people's perceptions of you is just as important as finding scum.

There's a difference between not being viewed as scum, which could be argued is a valid priority, and overpromoting yourself, which is, saying you are more townie than you are. Scum-hunting is the best way not to be viewed as scum, not over-hyping yourself or misrepresenting yourself.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, charter's entrance shakes things up a bit, don't it? A good portion of the Kirby case is pretty reasonable, and I could get behind it. One big old problem I have with your initial pass-through charter is how heavily you leaned on pairings. I mean, you said it yourself, you were up to 5 scum at one point. People agree with other's arguments all the time, do you really think it makes them any more likely to be scumbuddies? I really don't think it's a great scumhunting method until we actually have some flips.

For everyone, a question about charter's claim. I've never played with a Paranoid Gun Owner before, and as far as I can tell it's a pretty uncommon role. It's going to prevent cops/trackers from targeting him, so this seems like it would make for a pretty amazing fakeclaim. Is it common strategy for a PGO to claim on first post (essentially)? Possibilities that this is a really great fakeclaim? I have no idea, so other opinions/other games/discussions anyone could point me to would be helpful.

----

As for Monkey, the fact is he twisted himself into knots trying to explain his hands-off approach to SL vs his prying approach to Jordan, as well as the "OMGUS" attack on Jordan. Monkey's iso 25 "back off" post to EL reeks. Additionally, lost in the Monkey/Jordan claim debate is the fact that Monkey waited until L-1 to claim (in fact, he had a post w/o a claim while at L-1), even though he was supposedly a proponent of claiming earlier than that (L-2). Fear re: a fakeclaim? Also, the DDD-wagon is crap. I still like a Monkey-wagon.

----

People we haven't heard from in a while: ekiM, Snix, SL.

I'm a proponent of L-2 claiming, but I'm not a proponent of claiming without being asked. Since no one had asked me to claim at L-2, I didn't. Also, I was suspicious of the last two votes on my wagon.

And you say the DDD wagon is "crap", but don't offer any specific reasons one way or the other. Everyone is just supposed to take your word for it, as opposed to people who actually have valid reasons for their suspicions?

[MonkeyMan576]

btw, I've played with a PGO before, but not on MS. It's a fairly common role on the non-MS site where I play. That being said, it is a pretty easy fake role claim, especially since it's not used here often.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm a proponent of L-2 claiming, but I'm not a proponent of claiming without being asked. Since no one had asked me to claim at L-2, I didn't. Also, I was suspicious of the last two votes on my wagon.

contradicts with

I disagree, L-1 gives scum the opportunity to drop the hammer before the roleclaim, so L-2 is the more ideal time.

Is it about the possibility of hammer, or the claim request?

Both. Even if you have a policy on something like claiming, you can't use it as a hard and fast rule, without exceptions or evaluation of game conditions.

[MonkeyMan576]

You're not making much sense here. First I'm "only now not liking the last two votes," then you say how you do know that I "even mentioned before that I thought their votes were fishy." I mentioned it before, hence, it is not the first time I said I don't like the votes. And the continued absence of EL has made me feel he's a much better place to put my vote.

Well, you only now voted someone else. Before you said you didn't like the last two votes, but it seemed as if you still wanted MM lynched and you kept your vote on him. I think it's odd that it took you so long to decide to vote someone else. I really don't see why this change happened so long after the last two votes on him.

@charter: I'm not generally one to bite the hand that feeds me, but first you say I'm obvtown, and then you say all vanilla claims should be lynched. Which is it?

Vanilla's should be lynched. They're either scum or vanilla, neither is a big loss for the town. Claiming vanilla should never save you from a lynch. You claim has nothing to do with why I'm trying to get someone else lynched, I'd be doing it if you didn't claim (which you shouldn't have done, no one was threatening to hammer). I'm doing it because it's really obvious you're not scum, and there's no need to lynch you.

Kirbyoshi gets -1 points for failing to use any of the phrases "blatant(ly)", "ham-handed", "brazen", or "unabashedly" in his post.

Since DDD refuses to answer his accusations, and he was over-promoting himself early as obvtown, I'm inclined to,

Unvote:
Vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

Ok, you're going to have to start trying to help yourself. I'm done defending you now, if you keep doing stuff like this, you'll probably get yourself to L-1 again. Kirby's vote is scummy too, and I'm now REALLY sure he's scum. He dismisses everything I've said with "Most of charter's case against me is bullcrap" but of course doesn't explain why or anything. He also jumps on to DDD, which I guess is the next easy target for Kirbyscum to vote.

MM, you are obvtown because your wagon was obvscumdriven. It really has nothing to do with your play, which has not been stellar.

At first I was just gracious not to be on L-1 anymore, but looking at things a bit more objectively it looks a bit odd.

Are you even thinking? If I was scum, I would just post 'claimed vanilla, hammer' and proceed to night. Unless of course you're trying to argue that you are scum and I am scummy for calling you town. This seems very disingenuous to argue against preventing your own lynch.

You're not making much sense here. First I'm "only now not liking the last two votes," then you say how you do know that I "even mentioned before that I thought their votes were fishy." I mentioned it before, hence, it is not the first time I said I don't like the votes. And the continued absence of EL has made me feel he's a much better place to put my vote.

Well, you only now voted someone else. Before you said you didn't like the last two votes, but it seemed as if you still wanted MM lynched and you kept your vote on him. I think it's odd that it took you so long to decide to vote someone else. I really don't see why this change happened so long after the last two votes on him.

@charter: I'm not generally one to bite the hand that feeds me, but first you say I'm obvtown, and then you say all vanilla claims should be lynched. Which is it?

Vanilla's should be lynched. They're either scum or vanilla, neither is a big loss for the town. Claiming vanilla should never save you from a lynch. You claim has nothing to do with why I'm trying to get someone else lynched, I'd be doing it if you didn't claim (which you shouldn't have done, no one was threatening to hammer). I'm doing it because it's really obvious you're not scum, and there's no need to lynch you.

Kirbyoshi gets -1 points for failing to use any of the phrases "blatant(ly)", "ham-handed", "brazen", or "unabashedly" in his post.

Since DDD refuses to answer his accusations, and he was over-promoting himself early as obvtown, I'm inclined to,

Unvote:
Vote: Debonair Danny DiPietro

Ok, you're going to have to start trying to help yourself. I'm done defending you now, if you keep doing stuff like this, you'll probably get yourself to L-1 again. Kirby's vote is scummy too, and I'm now REALLY sure he's scum. He dismisses everything I've said with "Most of charter's case against me is bullcrap" but of course doesn't explain why or anything. He also jumps on to DDD, which I guess is the next easy target for Kirbyscum to vote.

MM, you are obvtown because your wagon was obvscumdriven. It really has nothing to do with your play, which has not been stellar.

At first I was just gracious not to be on L-1 anymore, but looking at things a bit more objectively it looks a bit odd.

Are you even thinking? If I was scum, I would just post 'claimed vanilla, hammer' and proceed to night. Unless of course you're trying to argue that you are scum and I am scummy for calling you town. This seems very disingenuous to argue against preventing your own lynch.

Okay, now I'm definately suspicious of you. You're acting like you're my savior, and I would have been lynched if not for you. It has nothing to do with MY arguments of course. Add to the fact your PGO claim. Then you call my play bad, when you have only been playing for a couple days, like your play has been so great.

[MonkeyMan576]

Alright, I'm going to shift gears here. Rather than picking apart Charter's game assessments, I want to examine the ramifications in general of his claim, how it can be proven, and a general town strategy to make use of it. If I have it right, he doesnt have to be smart, just alive if he is telling the truth.

Monkey, you said you had experience with it, so looking to hear you expound on the role in games you've played. The more I put thought to it, the more questions come up, and I think that some of them actually shouldn't be answered if he is town. Realize that this is a better MD discussion simply because of the ever present spectre of manipulating the argument to fit the game. Here's to objectivity.

So, if I understand this correctly, charter is claiming that anyone targeting him will die. If town, that is great for us as he can only die by being lynched. We get one more confirmed townie to endgame and we win. But, first we have to confirm charter's claim.
It seems the only opportunity is for a power role with targeting abilities to target charter and then die. Given charter's ability, for most roles that will be akin to trading a rook to save the queen. My hypothesis is that a power role targeting him and dying would confirm him as town. I cant fathom that scum would have that ability, then claim it for some reverse psychology ploy. It would make more sense for it to be a fake claim to

avoid

being targeted.
Now, of course, we have to confirm that the reason the power role died was indeed because of targeting. That should be a trick with scum having some options to play with it.
If we get 2 deaths, we can mostly assume that is what happened, though if a Vig or SK exists and actually made the 2nd kill, we would have to depend upon them then claiming in order to prevent charter from being wrongly 'confirmed'.
If we get 1 death and it is a power role that already softclaimed, it wont tell us anything. If it is a power role who

hasn't

claimed, I would tend to believe scum didn't kill in order to try to prevent charter from being confirmed.
I really don't like the odds on return should we have a town charter and only 1 death. We would have a dead power role and no information gained.
Now here all kind of WIFOM games could be played to trick scum up or trick ourselves up.
We can instruct our 2 softclaims to cast a random die, something like heads target charter, tails do nothing or target someone else. That accomplishes a few things.
First, they haven't claimed, so we don't know if they can target anyone or not in the first place. This adds to the random factor.
Second, if scum doesnt make a kill, hoping to discredit a confirm of charter if a power role dies, it is possible there will be a no kill.
Third, if charter is scum, he wont know who is doing the targeting in order to kill them to 'confirm' himself.

So...basically the best we can do is get the 2 softclaims to agree to flip a coin and target charter if it comes up heads. Even if you cant do it, and Jordan you better not say whether you can or not...
Then hope we get 2 deaths over the next night or two? The cost if we cant is that we will eventually be forced to decide to lynch charter or give the game over into his hands.
Of course we could end up with 2 PR targeting a town charter and both dying. Still, cant dictate who does it either.

There's a flaw in your plan. I'm a vanilla townie and can't target ANYONE. Jordan hasn't said weather he has a night action or not. Even if we could, sacrificing a townie to determine the alignment of a potential PGO is anti-town. Trading a non-power role townie for scum is acceptable, trading a townie to confirm another potential townie's claim is not. Even if someone were to die after they were instructed to target the PGO, there is no way to know with 100% certainty that that's what they died from. Sure, the evidence would be in favor of it, and that would be probably enough to lynch the PGO, but there are still ways clever scum could use it to their advantage. The better solution is to keep charter under the microscope, analyze who he votes for and doesn't vote for in relation to who ends up town and scum, and do our best to determine his alignment. If we get to endgame and three scum are dead and the game is over with a town victory, we know he is town. If there are two proven townies and him, we know he is obvscum. My point is, there are better ways to handle a PGO than to possibily lose someone over targeting him.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well there is another softclaim you are overlooking. You are also right, we don't know if they can target or not. Neither does scum. They almost certainly have to kill rather than risk a no kill when possibly nobody could target him even if they wanted to. But it is possible.
I also disagree with your assessment about the worth of a confirmed PGO. They are not simply another townie confirmed. To the mafia, they would become an

unkillable

confirmed townie and that is a far different and much more powerful creature. Now is that not right? Or does a target by mafia become a mutual kill? Even then we would force the mafia to take out one of themselves and if they are the last one they wont have that option even.

Here's the main thing I dislike about not finding a good way to confirm or debunk his claim. Scum dont have to get through endgame alive anymore. They just have to make it

to

endgame with charter alive. I'd prefer to find a way to turn it back on

them

and make them have to figure out how to deal with him, even at the loss of another (hopefully) minor power role.

If there is no way, there is no way but if there are other ideas to bat around, spit them out.

PGO's are not necessarily unkillable. Depending on the mod, if a killer targets them, they simply both die. That is, PGO's aren't necessarily bulletproof. But, put in those terms, if we found a player with a claimed night action that was acceptable to lose, and it meant that a scum had to die to kill the PGO, it would be a good tradeoff. But a competent mafia would probably try to kill the player that was targeting the PGO, so maybe not.

[MonkeyMan576]

Can someone elaborate on what is so scummy on Kirby's statement?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not resistant to a Kirby lynch, I merely wanted it to be an informed lynch, rather than an ignorant one. Note Jordan acting like he already knows how Kirby would flip if lynched.

Unvote:
Vote: Kirbyoshi

[MonkeyMan576]

L-2 by my count.

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt, sorry.

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt, sorry.

ovb your suspicious of me. For stupid and illogical reasons, but suspicious nonetheless. Give me any decent argument against me, and I'll refute it, as the truth is so easy to tell.

AFAIK, wanting someone to rush into a vote is scummy.

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt, sorry.

ovb your suspicious of me. For stupid and illogical reasons, but suspicious nonetheless. Give me any decent argument against me, and I'll refute it, as the truth is so easy to tell.

AFAIK, wanting someone to rush into a vote is scummy.

DO I want to rush a vote? Eh. Do we need to slow down?

1 sec...

So you would say anyone who would rather discuss the lynch or get more info about the scum aspect of it suspicious before voting is scummy, for the record?

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt, sorry.

ovb your suspicious of me. For stupid and illogical reasons, but suspicious nonetheless. Give me any decent argument against me, and I'll refute it, as the truth is so easy to tell.

AFAIK, wanting someone to rush into a vote is scummy.

DO I want to rush a vote? Eh. Do we need to slow down?

1 sec...

So you would say anyone who would rather discuss the lynch or get more info about the scum aspect of it suspicious before voting is scummy, for the record?

No. But I j ust noted it. You are so pushy lol.

So you are saying I am scummy for wanting more info about the statement, but you wouldn't have the same standard for someone else?

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt, sorry.

ovb your suspicious of me. For stupid and illogical reasons, but suspicious nonetheless. Give me any decent argument against me, and I'll refute it, as the truth is so easy to tell.

AFAIK, wanting someone to rush into a vote is scummy.

DO I want to rush a vote? Eh. Do we need to slow down?

1 sec...

So you would say anyone who would rather discuss the lynch or get more info about the scum aspect of it suspicious before voting is scummy, for the record?

No. But I j ust noted it. You are so pushy lol.

So you are saying I am scummy for wanting more info about the statement, but you wouldn't have the same standard for someone else?

well I already suspect you. Still, you incorrectly believe I'm mafia w/o much reasoning or info, so how can I blame you for not wanting to be sure?

So fine. A bit of bias against the player ,who keeps attacking me by focusing on my every word like being town makes me perfect, has given me double standards.

I'm not focusing on your "every word", rushing someone's vote is a pretty big deal. Your suspicions of me started with you thinking I was "strange" without providing any reasons, so if anyone has a lack of reasoning, it's you by far. I'd like you to specifically say what suspicions of mine regarding you are unreasonable or illogical, and why.

[MonkeyMan576]

Alt, sorry.

ovb your suspicious of me. For stupid and illogical reasons, but suspicious nonetheless. Give me any decent argument against me, and I'll refute it, as the truth is so easy to tell.

AFAIK, wanting someone to rush into a vote is scummy.

DO I want to rush a vote? Eh. Do we need to slow down?

1 sec...

So you would say anyone who would rather discuss the lynch or get more info about the scum aspect of it suspicious before voting is scummy, for the record?

No. But I j ust noted it. You are so pushy lol.

So you are saying I am scummy for wanting more info about the statement, but you wouldn't have the same standard for someone else?

well I already suspect you. Still, you incorrectly believe I'm mafia w/o much reasoning or info, so how can I blame you for not wanting to be sure?

So fine. A bit of bias against the player ,who keeps attacking me by focusing on my every word like being town makes me perfect, has given me double standards.

I'm not focusing on your "every word", rushing someone's vote is a pretty big deal. Your suspicions of me started with you thinking I was "strange" without providing any reasons, so if anyone has a lack of reasoning, it's you by far. I'd like you to specifically say what suspicions of mine regarding you are unreasonable or illogical, and why.

I've already decided to believe youre town for now. You are too persistent not to be. I could rephrease my suspicioun with "I'm keeping my eye on you"; that you slightly irk me. But that is all.

Now...tell me what you think about kirby.

Note for the record this is the second time you've backtracked, the first being when you originally said claiming vanilla was scummy.

[MonkeyMan576]

And obviously, regarding Kirby, charter's argument is pretty strong, hence my vote, but if Kirby flips town, charter and you are my top suspects.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sigh. I wonder what else ur wrong about.

Wow, your well reasoned arguments are so overwhelming.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sigh. I wonder what else ur wrong about.

Wow, your well reasoned arguments are so overwhelming.

hypocrisy...

But, since you refuse to back up your arguments, your statements like these are pointless.

[MonkeyMan576]

Explain how wanting to get more information before voting is scummy. Explain why vanilla claimers should be auto-lynched.

[MonkeyMan576]

I never said vanilla claimers should be autolynched. I said it shouldnt affect the votes. Didnt I address this?

And I granted you that first one already. Thats why i said tat post was "noted", and not scummy. Get it? Noted means "stored for future reference". OK?

I get that it's backtracking, and scummy. Now, you're suggesting that if someone claims vanilla, others should act like the claim never happened for the rest of the game?

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Charter

for defrending DDD and starting the Kirby wagon.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'd urge you guys to take another look at the reasons you find people suspicious -- and focus them on the scum NK over the mislynch. Most people, by my reasoning, are going to be suspicious by link to ML.

DDD is directly linked to ML, if Charter is scummy by defending DDD then let's look at the source: DDD. I know I FoS'd Charter because I can't be certain, but I think we're looking at his claim being true and a dead scum because he's actually a PGO.

I feel like Snix isn't scum because he would've jumped on the Monkey wagon when he had a chance (L-1). I agree with Ectomancer in that Monkey is far more likely to be town since ML was riding his wagon so hard, which I can't see as distancing.

By extension, if Monkey is cleared by that, which he is in my eyes, Charter is the one who showed up and basically saved us from mislynching him, even if it did lead into another mislynch.

I think Charter is scum that was trying to build town cred. First of all, his claim is suspicious. First of all, it's a rarely used role, and second of all, it can be used to scare players from investigating him. The post that really raised my eyebrows was:

Ok, you're going to have to start trying to help yourself. I'm done defending you now, if you keep doing stuff like this, you'll probably get yourself to L-1 again. Kirby's vote is scummy too, and I'm now REALLY sure he's scum. He dismisses everything I've said with "Most of charter's case against me is bullcrap" but of course doesn't explain why or anything. He also jumps on to DDD, which I guess is the next easy target for Kirbyscum to vote.

It sounds like the fact that he is defending me makes him obvtown, or that because he claimed he should be free from attack. It really lends question to his motives. That, and the fact that Kirby ended up town after Charter insisted fairly heavily he was scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

Also, who ever heard of a town janitor?

[MonkeyMan576]

MonkeyMan576:

MM, please look at how ML responded to my claim. Also note that "starting the Kirby wagon" is not a scumtell. And please tell me why I shouldn't say I don't think DDD is town, since he's given me no reason to think otherwise. Finally, please tell me why you are voting me.

Leading a wagon against a townie is a scumtell. You don't think voting records should be used in casebuildling? If you think DDD is town, and several players think he is scummy, maybe you should rethink your position. And I've already stated why I am voting for you, if you read my post.

[MonkeyMan576]

MonkeyMan576:

MM, please look at how ML responded to my claim. Also note that "starting the Kirby wagon" is not a scumtell. And please tell me why I shouldn't say I don't think DDD is town, since he's given me no reason to think otherwise. Finally, please tell me why you are voting me.

Leading a wagon against a townie is a scumtell. You don't think voting records should be used in casebuildling? If you think DDD is town, and several players think he is scummy, maybe you should rethink your position. And I've already stated why I am voting for you, if you read my post.

Ok, I give up. This is so assbackwards, I don't know what to do. First off, you tell me why ML reacted the way he did to my claim, and why that makes me scum.

Leading a wagon against a townie is not a scumtell. I was scumhunting, I thought Kirby was scum, and I did my best to show that to others. If you disagreed with it so much as to find it suspicious, then you needed to say that yesterday, but YOU AGREED WITH ME. You FOS'ed him in your first post after I replaced. How can you fault me because the degree I found him suspicious was greater than the degree you did? MAKES NO SENSE. I just got to page 357 and YOU VOTED HIM! How can you say I'm scummy for voting him when you voted him yourself? Because I voted him first and stopped your wagon? It seems like you're arguing that I'm scum since I started the Kirby wagon instead of hammering you, it doesn't make any sense to me. By that logic, I had to start a wagon on scum in order for me to be town, on day one with no info or flips, or should I have just hammered you? I really don't know what you expected me to do there. What 'should' I have done when I replaced in, in your opinion?

Voting records SHOULD be used in casebuilding, but that's not what you're doing. My voting record was "vote Kirby". You should be looking for people that were voting you when it was popular, then switched on to Kirby, or something like that. Townies vote for townies, it happens. If the logic someone is using to vote is sound, then it isn't a scumtell. If someone is just opportunistically voting, that IS suspicious. (I'll deal with 'oh but DDD is doing this' later)

You voted me for defending DDD and starting the Kirby wagon. I've already covered why I started the Kirby wagon and why that isn't suspicious. As for why I'm defending DDD, it's because his play here is pretty much a clone of Stratego mafia (it's ongoing, so I won't say more, but he's already dead). I really can't give any more than that, other than I do not find his play suspicious. It's very bold and aggressive. He whooped me as scum once, and he was very cautious and left all his options open, at all times. He's definitely not doing that here. So that's why I don't have a scumread on DDD, meta. I suppose you can use 'charter defended DDD' as a reason to vote me, but why wouldn't you use 'ML defended Ecto', because ML IS scum? (I'm not saying do that either, since I'm way less sure, but you get the point) It seems very presumptuous to vote me because I defended DDD when you don't know DDD's alignment. DDD could be town and I'd be right to defend him.

What I do not understand, is why you are completely ignoring the fact that we have one scum dead. Why?

I have a right to change my mind. In fact I have a duty to change my mind when circumstances change. You're suggesting that if I hold a position on someone in one instance, I'm obligated to keep that position?

I'm not ignoring the dead scum. But we don't know what caused that death, and we do know what caused the townie death.

You're using mostly meta as your argument, and I don't really like that strategy. It can be used to defend or attack anyone, regardless of their true alignment. Meta is a pretty weak analysis compared to other in game tools.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM, also, please explain this:

you tell me why ML reacted the way he did to my claim, and why that makes me scum.

I'm not sure which reaction you're referring to...

[MonkeyMan576]

MM, also, please explain this:

you tell me why ML reacted the way he did to my claim, and why that makes me scum.

I'm not sure which reaction you're referring to...

This, MM.

For everyone, a question about charter's claim. I've never played with a Paranoid Gun Owner before, and as far as I can tell it's a pretty uncommon role. It's going to prevent cops/trackers from targeting him, so this seems like it would make for a pretty amazing fakeclaim. Is it common strategy for a PGO to claim on first post (essentially)? Possibilities that this is a really great fakeclaim? I have no idea, so other opinions/other games/discussions anyone could point me to would be helpful.

ALSO, PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTIONS IN POST 433.

I agree that it makes a good fakeclaim.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not ignoring the dead scum. But we don't know what caused that death, and we do know what caused the townie death.

What does it matter what caused his death? He had interactions with scumbuddies yesterday, you're ignoring all of ML's play.
[

I'm not ignoring his play, I'm just looking at everyone's play equally. I would think knowing if someone died from scum or vigilante or what have you would have a big difference in who is suspect.

[MonkeyMan576]

MONKEYMAN, THESE QUESTIONS PLEASE:

Questions you ignored that you need to answer.

How can you fault me because the degree I found him suspicious was greater than the degree you did?

By that logic, I had to start a wagon on scum in order for me to be town, on day one with no info or flips, or should I have just hammered you?

What 'should' I have done when I replaced in, in your opinion?

Last time I'm going to ask.

Maybe if you consolidated your questions they'd be easier to answer. I don't really care how many times you ask something. I'm not obligated to answer anything.

-You say you found him more supsicious, I say you could be scum trying to get townies lynched. I'd prefer it not happen again.

-I'm not saying you are definately scum or town, I'm saying starting wagons on townies is a scumtell. You have to take responsibility for your actions.

-Well, your abrasive actions are suspicious. Rather than discuss the situation with other players, you built a case without any input from anyone else. You still seem rather set in your opinions and unwilling to change your mind.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, looks like I can't nail you to a cross due to a technicality (not talking about my catch up post), but I'm still really sure you're scum.

You mean like you were really sure of Kirbyoshi?

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry, alt...

Unvote:
Vote: DDD

[MonkeyMan576]

There's a chance he could be a non-sane cop. But with my earlier leanings I'm willing to risk it.

[MonkeyMan576]

@charter: You really think if there are other cops out there, they should claim, given that there may be multiple sanities? Sounds like rolefishing to me.

[MonkeyMan576]

And Danny still didn't claim his role, which makes him look pretty bad.

I agree with this. DDD should claim.

[MonkeyMan576]

@DDD:So, you brush off attacks on you and act condescending early in the wagon, and then get hyper-defensive at the end of the wagon, and you want sympathy?

[MonkeyMan576]

@charter: Directing night actions is incredibly scummy, you've already shoved the town enough as it is...

[MonkeyMan576]

@charter: Directing night actions is incredibly scummy, you've already shoved the town enough as it is...

First off, he's asking the town about what to do. Second, I am trying to help, but people need to believe, I'll fullclaim tomorrow, and like I said, lynch me if you think it makes me scum.

It doesn't have to be ecto or ekim, but it SHOULD not be elvis or myself. I just think that if elvis isn't scum, one of those two is most likely to be scum.

I thought acting anti-town made you scummy today, why would I think differently tomorrow. If it were me I absolutely not listen to charter's "advice".

[MonkeyMan576]

You're an SK charter, give it up. The PGO claim was to avoid an investigation that would reveal a guilty.

This...isn't a sk more dangeorus than scum we can lynch tomorrow? We could avoid a NK.

Unvote:
Vote: Charter

[MonkeyMan576]

You're an SK charter, give it up. The PGO claim was to avoid an investigation that would reveal a guilty.

This...isn't a sk more dangeorus than scum we can lynch tomorrow? We could avoid a NK.

Unvote:
Vote: Charter

Pretty sure it's a little late for you to come to your senses.

Well, this would you an opportunity to give us a night action result...if you can show you are telling the truth, I might believe you, but I doubt you are. If the rest of the players agree with me, you'll still probably be lynched tomorrow, so I don't get what you are so excited about.

[MonkeyMan576]

Speaking of which, what was your night action result last night?

[MonkeyMan576]

Speaking of which, what was your night action result last night?

Your ignorance is disgusting. I already provided that information in post 530.

You don't need to be insulting, it's not getting you any town points. Like I said, you're on a short leash, as far as I'm concerned, so there's no reason to get excited.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm showing DDD at L-2 before my unvote...

EL, MM, Charter, Elvis, Ecto

[MonkeyMan576]

Ah yes, my bad. Well, if DDD is telling the truth, we can lynch charter tomorrow, then EL.

[MonkeyMan576]

Strange that charter fakeclaimed as town.

Vote: Ecto

He was buddying with Jordan before, and one of the players charter fingered before he died.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, that would be convenient for you.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, charter did hit scum N1, so in that sense, his play was not bad. I'm having a hard time understanding the rest of his play though.

And I guess EL was an insane or paranoid cop? That's unexpected in a mini.

One of the reasons I think snix is the scummiest is that he already said something like maybe EL is insane cop. Which is something I wouldn't expect anyone to guess. But if you're scum you know that's probably the case if EL and DDD are not on your team. Also, I think snix has the strongest ties to ML... how he attacked ML and Ecto and voted ecto over ML.

I hate no lynching, but this is probably one of the those situations where it could be good. Even number alive. And we're probably at lylo assuming 2 scum left. So we basically have to lynch right today or do a no-lynch and hope for some info overnight.

I don't like no-lynches, especially when someone who hasn't claimed calls for one. The call for a no lynch seems very self serving coming from Ecto, although I agree Snix is worth looking at.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry, alt

Unvote:
Vote: Snix

[MonkeyMan576]

Or, elvis, so I can figure out who is scum?

You yourself just said that we don't have any power rolls left. ]

We are not in a situation to be hasty or quick with voting.

But you were pretty hasty in asking for a mass claim.

[MonkeyMan576]

Think about it, no lynch doesn't hurt town. Especially when we are a confused town. It prevents us from mislynching and gives us more to go on the next day. Scum want a lynch so long as it doesn't involve them.

Scum would also favor a no lynch if a potential lynch does involve them. All these mass claim or no lynch gimmicks rather than talking about suspects and figuring out who is scum is rather scummy IMHO.

[MonkeyMan576]

Think about it, no lynch doesn't hurt town. Especially when we are a confused town. It prevents us from mislynching and gives us more to go on the next day. Scum want a lynch so long as it doesn't involve them.

Scum would also favor a no lynch if a potential lynch does involve them. All these mass claim or no lynch gimmicks rather than talking about suspects and figuring out who is scum is rather scummy IMHO.

Defending myself is scummy? Since when.

Defending yourself by asking for a mass claim is scummy.

[MonkeyMan576]

Ok, I can't help it.

Pro-town - No Lynch in order to mathematically improve odds. In hand with this goes a no information clause.

Monkey is opposed to a No Lynch, despite a valid logical and mathematically provable case for it.

Pro-town - Deciding to use 4 town voices against 2 scum, rather than 3 vs 2 tomorrow. Decision must be made correctly or we lose. All possible information must be divulged today and now, including a mass claim.

Despite being against a No Lynch that would improve town's odds, Monkey is also against divulging all information in order to improve our odds of making a good decision.

In other words, Monkey is siding with the best scum scenario.

Snix on the other hand, is trying to both support a No Lynch

and

get a mass claim going.

You two are being seriously anti-town. You need to shape up and be seriously awesome instead. Just vote No Lynch and stop chattering.

We didn't get any night action info today(so far), what makes you think we'd get some tomorrow? And mass claiming only makes things easier for the scum to know who to kill. Even it's only an educated guess, it's better than just giving scum a free kill.

[MonkeyMan576]

Ok, I can't help it.

Pro-town - No Lynch in order to mathematically improve odds. In hand with this goes a no information clause.

Monkey is opposed to a No Lynch, despite a valid logical and mathematically provable case for it.

Pro-town - Deciding to use 4 town voices against 2 scum, rather than 3 vs 2 tomorrow. Decision must be made correctly or we lose. All possible information must be divulged today and now, including a mass claim.

Despite being against a No Lynch that would improve town's odds, Monkey is also against divulging all information in order to improve our odds of making a good decision.

In other words, Monkey is siding with the best scum scenario.

Snix on the other hand, is trying to both support a No Lynch

and

get a mass claim going.

You two are being seriously anti-town. You need to shape up and be seriously awesome instead. Just vote No Lynch and stop chattering.

We didn't get any night action info today(so far), what makes you think we'd get some tomorrow? And mass claiming only makes things easier for the scum to know who to kill. Even it's only an educated guess, it's better than just giving scum a free kill.

Not if the educated guess kills town, then we're giving Scum 2 free kills.

Basically you're saying we have to claim because we suck, which shows a total lack of faith in our abilities...

[MonkeyMan576]

I can't speak for Elvis, but why would I vote no lynch when I am against it?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm usually supsicious of people who quit games.

FOS: Kikuchiyo

Not to mention Jordan was suspicious anyway.

[MonkeyMan576]

Are you also suspicious of people who replace into games? I've got some reading to do so don't expect anything too soon.

Well, people that replace into games unfortunately don't get a clean slate.

[MonkeyMan576]

I am for a Jordan or Ecto lynch.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote

[MonkeyMan576]

Kikuchiyo now, not Jordan obviously.

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay, I wanted to get to this thread tonight but I have run out of time for a thorough read. will someone present the case for no-lynch?

So why do you think Jordan is scum?

Still waiting here.

I have no problem with massclaim at this time if majority wants it.

Can someone present a case on Snix?

Monkey, why change from Snix?

There's a case on Jordan in day 1, I don't have the time to look for it right now. I changed from Snix, because Kirby fingered Ecto before he was lynched, and I don't like the way Ecto is trying to desuede everyone from a standard lynch. No lynches and mass claims rub me the wrong way.

[MonkeyMan576]

Kiku already said she has no time.

Ekim is right.

No lynch today, mass claiming tomorrow. It's pretty basic Mafia logic. There are six of us, so we have a roughly 33% chance of finding scum. If we don't lynch then tomorrow we will have a roughly 40% chance. And we shouldn't be talking about anything else today if that's what we're doing, because we don't want to help scum find the best night kill.

Kiku, Monkey is flailing around right now because he knows he is the only one remaining with a good case against them. He pre-emptively voted me first because I was the one who drove that wagon, and I'm certain he expected me to go back to it. The no lynch looks stronger than a Snix lynch, so he is going after another target (or two) to see if anything sticks. Heh, he didn't even look it up to see what it was, just "I know there was a case" where Jordan was concerned. Well the case was Jordan made some pre-game chatter and it went from there. There is no case against me and Monkey has made no effort to make one, but needed to go on the offensive against me so is "having problems with" basic mafia theory.

I don't care if Monkey is town at this point. The game he is playing is one of self-preservation and it is perfectly obvious that he is willing to lynch someone

without bothering to look at cases

. He just wants someone lynched, and he

refuses

to explain why he is opposed to either one of the 2 pro-town options we have today (no lynch and say nothing, or mass claim and gamble on our lynch today)

Alrighty then. Lynch me or Monkey today, one or the other. (or the 4 of you can no lynch) I'm sure a case can be fabricated against me so you can argue over the merits of either. Have fun.

unvote, vote Monkey

I have a very good case against you that a person who died fingered you. You were buddying with Jordan, who I also believe was scummy, and now, you are trying to get the town to either mass claim or no lynch, although now you can't seem to make up your mind, because you've voted me. It's pretty obvious I've nailed scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Ecto

Same reasons as before...fingered by Kirby, buddying with Jordan, in favor of non-lynch scenarios.

[MonkeyMan576]

Works for me...

Unvote:
Vote: Elvis_knits

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Elvis_knits

I'm a roll blocker, I blocked Elvis, there was no night kill. Anyone else see what I'm getting at?

Two things:

1: It's LYLO and no reason this couldn't be a gambit.
2: Scum can do math too and likely decided not to oblige with an NK to narrow the field.

What that means is that you are either pulling a gambit, or if you are a roleblocker, it doesnt mean Elvis is guilty because it makes just as much sense for scum to no kill.

Once again Monkey is making no effort, at all. This is pretty easy to reason out, and he didn't even bother trying before throwing down a vote in LYLO.

Snix can reason out the same thing, but I see no reason why he should hide this information if indeed a roleblocker. No reason not to try the gambit as tomorrow is LYLO also even if we guess right today. His lack of a vote following his pronouncement was a plus, but my feeling is that a scumSnix would also be cautious with that vote. Neutral on Snix's opening play today.

I'd prefer if we see the results of my vote before you call my play bad.

Thank you.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'd prefer if you were worth a bear squat in the woods. You voted me twice...remember? I don't need to see the result of that. I already know what it would be. Even if you are town and happen to place a vote on scum at some point, you certainly wont accomplish it through any actual effort on your part.

How about some real analyzing and work from you?

Thank you.

It's an easy play for me. We vote elvis and if he's scum, yay, and if not, we vote snix for lying. One or the other is probably scum. And don't think my scum vibes on you have subsided, I'm guessing you're the third mafia.

[MonkeyMan576]

You're assuming snix isn't a roleblocker. If he is and elvis is scum, then there won't be a nk if elvis tries to kill again.

Of course, there's the possibility of the other scum doing the kill...

I'm not opposed to going after the third mafia, the thing is I suspect it's ecto. Just because someone has sound mafia theory skills doesn't mean they're not scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

Already claimed...

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm still for the Elvis lynch, and Ecto is my second choice.

[MonkeyMan576]

I would certainly bank on two scum still alive, solely based off the fact that town has five(one alleged) power roles and the only dead scum is vanilla. Not sure if my mind will change on my read through, but I think it would be foolish to assume anything less. due to kill flavor, though, I would assume the actual tally is one scum, one sk. Unless someone took credit for the blowings up?

Without the read through, Monkey looks like the safest lynch. He is certainly the most anti-town.

I think it was charter who blew people up. He was a compulsive vig, IIRC.

I also think there are 2 scum left. In a gave with a compulsive vig it doesn't make sense for there to be less. I don't often see ANY mini game with less that 3 to start.

At this point, I don't favor lynching ecto. That seems like the worst thing we could do, and I don't know why monkey suggests it. Monkey is looking better and better to me since he has not done one good thing for the town. I also find it hard to believe he's this clueless.

Well, you wouldn't if he's your scumbuddy. Wanting to lynch me is fairly self serving and OMGUSy.

[MonkeyMan576]

The reason is you seem the least like scum to me.

I'm trying to think of the possible scenarios. Let's say snix is scum and you and him cooked up this little gambit. You would obviously support him in trying to lynch me (sort of like how monkey is acting). Or you could go for the buss and try to get him lynched. But you don't want to lynch either of us, which seems like it is not helpful to you if you're scum.

Let's say snix is town and you're scum who sent in a no-kill last night. Which gives a sort of false positive to snix. Well, if you're scum this is your dream scenario, this is what you would have been hoping for, and you definitely support snix and try to lynch me (again, like monkey is doing). But you're not trying to lynch me, so this scenario isn't true.

So whether or not snix is scum, you're not acting like scum would act in any scenario I can think of.

On the other hand, whether snix is scum or not, monkey

is

acting the part of scum.

Only in your world, Elvis. We supposedly should ignore the night action implications against you.

[MonkeyMan576]

The reason is you seem the least like scum to me.

I'm trying to think of the possible scenarios. Let's say snix is scum and you and him cooked up this little gambit. You would obviously support him in trying to lynch me (sort of like how monkey is acting). Or you could go for the buss and try to get him lynched. But you don't want to lynch either of us, which seems like it is not helpful to you if you're scum.

Let's say snix is town and you're scum who sent in a no-kill last night. Which gives a sort of false positive to snix. Well, if you're scum this is your dream scenario, this is what you would have been hoping for, and you definitely support snix and try to lynch me (again, like monkey is doing). But you're not trying to lynch me, so this scenario isn't true.

So whether or not snix is scum, you're not acting like scum would act in any scenario I can think of.

On the other hand, whether snix is scum or not, monkey

is

acting the part of scum.

Only in your world, Elvis. We supposedly should ignore the night action implications against you.

Monkey... seriously, are you this clueless or are you scum?

He could be LYING or scum could have no-killed last night. This is not a black and white issue even if you're not me with the benefit of knowing my allignment. You're acting like the result is definitive and it's not.

It's not definitive, but ecto's previous play and kirby's analysis point to him being scum, imho. No need for the insulting appeal to emotion.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well I didn't mean to appeal to emotion. If you're telling me you're not clueless and you're really paying attention to this game and thinking things through then I have to conclude that you're scum.

Which, is, again, OMGUS.

[MonkeyMan576]

In the previous page, Elvis has WIFOM'd(guessing at Ecto's behavior), OMGUS(calling me scummy for voting her), and appealed to emotion(calling me clueless).

My vote stays. I believe snix.

[MonkeyMan576]

You are definitely clueless. You can believe Snix is a roleblocker and blocked Elvis last night and it still does not make Elvis scum.

More appeal to emotion. Calling me clueless without actually giving a reason?

[MonkeyMan576]

How does looking at the possible scenarios = WIFOM?

And I didn't call you scummy for voting me. I showed how anyone who is scum in this situation is going to want to vote me. It's not like I'm mad you're voting me so I'm calling you scum. I showed you how it favors scum to act how you're acting.

Also, I was more asking if you were than calling you clueless. And it's because you are ignoring everything that doesn't match with what you want to do.

I'm not ignoring alternative evidence. Trying to guess what scum would do vs. what town would do is the very definition of WIFOM, and a possible scum tactic. It's not a towntell, at the least.

[MonkeyMan576]

It's like if you knew both wine glasses had poison in it, it doesn't matter which one you pick.

In Mafia, WIFOM arguments are often a

Scum tactic

used to distract the Town. The scum will make an unusual play at night, which would lead to a situation that would 'clear' them (because players will think, "Why would a scum do that?"). These arguments are sometimes used by Newbies and should be avoided in favor of clearer arguments.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't understand how you quoting the wiki makes your point at all.

Trying to discern how ecto's play is town vs. scum is WIFOM. WIFOM is scummy, especially when you are the subject of a night action result.

[MonkeyMan576]

I wasn't making huge leaps there monkey. Unless you think scum don't like to lynch town.

Scum will lynch scum all the time. I did it in my last game that just ended. It's called bussing. Standard scum tactic.

[MonkeyMan576]

I feel like I'm talking to a wall.

I accounted for bussing. If ecto were scum and snix were scum then he could either try to lynch me or go for the buss by lynching snix. Seeing as he doesn't want to de either, I do not think they are scum together.

I didn't suggest ecto and snix were scum, I suggested you and ecto were scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

It's ok, I'm not worried about it. I know why Jordan likely did it, I'll find a link later. Unvote Snix though. I explained why. Monkey is our lynch today methinks. let's just chat a bit first though.

More OMGUS. Let's hear from the people I'm not fingering.

[MonkeyMan576]

There will be two scum left. Two scum out of twelve is just about balanced in mountainous, let alone with a town vig, cop, and possibly roleblocker too. Probably both power roles, something like redirector or framer to explain EL.

I'm not bothered that Jordan claimed not to be vanilla, I could see a new player like him doing that.

I'm trying to remember why I thought monkey looked town earlier. He certainly doesn't today.

Ecto's logic on not lynching either Snix or Elvis is sound, unless there's some stronger evidence on either one than I've seen so far. Anyone who disagrees, explain why. His reasoning is here: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 87#1911387

I think I need a full re-read but it's Friday and I'm tired.

I don't like that Ecto proposes who not to lynch, without stating a good lynch target. It sounds like he's just trying to hinder the town, the same way he was trying to hinder the town yesterday by wanting a no lynch and mass claim. Seriously, proposing a no lynch and then claiming a roleblocker is lying about them is a pretty obvious scum gambit in my book.

[MonkeyMan576]

I get the feeling that you haven't finished reading yet. It doesnt matter if Snix or Elvis is scum today because they are trapped in a bubble we can pop tomorrow so long as we choose correctly between 4 of us today (Ecto, Kiku, Ekim, Monkey).

My assessment of you is through my assessment of your predecessor's play.
Ekim is not outstandingly town, but has done some good things and nothing bad that I see.
Monkey has reason upon reason to lynch him. As in, I can't not lynch him today. I'm 90-95% convinced I'm right.

Also, here the url again for why we don't lynch Elvis or Snix today

viewtopic.php?p=1911387#1911387

If you want, we can go even further into why, even if there is a redirector.

Now I do think Snix is likely scum, but we still play it safe.

Ecto is playing exactly like charter(who was actually town but lied about his role, which was scummy). He's trying way to hard to get his way, pretending he is using logic just because he posts the same thing over and over.

[MonkeyMan576]

There will be two scum left. Two scum out of twelve is just about balanced in mountainous, let alone with a town vig, cop, and possibly roleblocker too. Probably both power roles, something like redirector or framer to explain EL.

I'm not bothered that Jordan claimed not to be vanilla, I could see a new player like him doing that.

I'm trying to remember why I thought monkey looked town earlier. He certainly doesn't today.

Ecto's logic on not lynching either Snix or Elvis is sound, unless there's some stronger evidence on either one than I've seen so far. Anyone who disagrees, explain why. His reasoning is here: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 87#1911387

I think I need a full re-read but it's Friday and I'm tired.

I don't like that Ecto proposes who not to lynch, without stating a good lynch target. It sounds like he's just trying to hinder the town, the same way he was trying to hinder the town yesterday by wanting a no lynch and mass claim. Seriously, proposing a no lynch and then claiming a roleblocker is lying about them is a pretty obvious scum gambit in my book.

No. Ecto did not want us to claim yesterday.

Snix is the one who tried to start a mass claim without agreement.

How is "proposing a no-lynch and then claiming a role blocker is lying" an obvious scum gambit?? I have not heard of this one.

Because you avoid a lynch and then avoid responsibility of any night action results.

[MonkeyMan576]

@621
Mass claim and get this over with?

@633
No lynch should have occurred without conversation.

Gonna apologize about the "lying" statement?

It's a gambit because the mafia is trying to get away with as few deaths as possible.

[MonkeyMan576]

No, I will not be apologizing because those quotes are completely out of context monkey.

Did you miss what ecto was saying all day yesterday??

I believe we are in a No Lynch situation.

A No Lynch is simple math.

Pro-town - No Lynch in order to mathematically improve odds.

So do you two plan to wait until Jordan gets here so you can at best get a /random roll, or are you going to move the game along and vote No Lynch?

There are more quotes... ecto wants to no-lynch all day long. He onle talks about massclaiming when he thinks he has no choice.

If we decide to lynch, we can argue over mass claims, etc when that time comes.

I don't buy that. We always have choices. Your hyper-defence of ecto is rather telling.

[MonkeyMan576]

No, I will not be apologizing because those quotes are completely out of context monkey.

Did you miss what ecto was saying all day yesterday??

I believe we are in a No Lynch situation.

A No Lynch is simple math.

Pro-town - No Lynch in order to mathematically improve odds.

So do you two plan to wait until Jordan gets here so you can at best get a /random roll, or are you going to move the game along and vote No Lynch?

There are more quotes... ecto wants to no-lynch all day long. He onle talks about massclaiming when he thinks he has no choice.

If we decide to lynch, we can argue over mass claims, etc when that time comes.

I don't buy that. We always have choices. Your hyper-defence of ecto is rather telling.

HOW CAN YOU NOT BUY THAT? Read ecto's posts. Is there really any doubt he wanted a no lynch and he did NOT want a mass claim??

How do you know what he wanted or didn't want? Can you read his mind or are you talking in a different forum?

[MonkeyMan576]

Why, because I don't agree with Elvis' argument? I've been playing the whole game, you replace in and decide that Ecto is pro-town?

[MonkeyMan576]

Lynch all Lyars.

Unvote:
Vote: Snix

[MonkeyMan576]

Snix' claim seems to be a bit convoluted to me, and he lied about his role originally, so I feel comfortable lynching him at this point.

[MonkeyMan576]

I find it very hard to believe that a pro-town role would know how many scum they are. That is a traditional scum trait.

[MonkeyMan576]

I find it very hard to believe that a pro-town role would know how many scum they are. That is a traditional scum trait.

I bet I've reckoned correctly how many scum are in a game by time it was half over in at least 95% of my games as town.


Kiku, I'm not trying to rag on you, just thinking you would have retained that since it happened recently and involved your statements and those were the responses to them.

Yeah, but he is saying it was in his role pm, which I find hard to believe in a townie.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well played, the mafia caused enough confusion in the endgame to get the result they wanted. Pretty much textbook as to how to play as mafia.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't really understand how ecto can whine about me going after him when he was lying about his role as town. This is about the scummiest thing you can do.

If Snix hadn't changed his rc(another lie) I would have stayed with Elvis.

I think overall my play was pretty good. Usually if you lynch town liars, you'll get scum, it just wasn't true in this case.

[MonkeyMan576]

I meant charter, not ecto.