Mafia 103 - Ktown Mafia (Game Over)

[Wickedestjr]

/confirm

/confirm.... that

, apart from Wickedestjr,

I am the best scum/town player ever!!!!

Fixed.


*waits for YamiJoey and magichands*

[Wickedestjr]

Has anybody figured out who's scum yet?

[Wickedestjr]

the game hasn't even begun.

I'm asking in case somebody already figured it out.

[Wickedestjr]

Haylen is scum. Here is my case;

Has anybody figured out who's scum yet?

Yep. J-Fox and YamiJoey. She hasn't been around long enough to know his name unless they have been talking pre-game. So bleh!

Haylen, awesome scumhunter ftw.

Says she thinks J-Fox and YamiJoey are scum, yet votes for herself and dayvigs another person. It's like she's trying to avoid scumhunting. Also she seems to know that there are two scum. How could she know this?


So...

Vote: Haylen

[Wickedestjr]

CrueKnight - Do you believe Haylen's claim?

Furry - Why did you replace into this game? Was it because you wanted to play as scum and thought magichands was scum? How did you figure it out?

cruelty - How many scumbuddies do you have apart from Mr. Squirrel?

YamiJoey - Why did you take so long to confirm? Were you discussing tactics with your scumbuddies?

Scott Brosius - Who do you think is more likely to be scum: malpascp or SolemnJ?

Mr. Squirrel - Are you good at scumhunting? Should I keep my expectations high?

malpascp - Do you think you're going to win this game?

J-Fox - Are you scum or town? Tell the truth.

SolemnJ - I know you're a Serial Killer. Who are you planning on killing tonight?

DeathNote - Why are you fine with 2nd? Is it because you are scum and are planning to prove me wrong by winning this game?

Torqez - What do you think of Furry's vote for you?

VistaSoldier - Which one of these four players is most likely to be scum and which is most likely to be town and give reasons for both;

Scott Brosius
cruelty
Torqez
Katniss


Katniss - What do you think about this game so far? Do you think we are almost ready to start discussing seriously? When would you like to begin discussing seriously?

[Wickedestjr]

You believed my claims...?

Why shouldn't I have? Are you backtracking now and saying they weren't real?

And stop trying to end the RVS quickly. >.> I like the RVS.

I don't like the RVS that much. The faster we can leave it the better. Don't you agree with me?

[Wickedestjr]

No, I like the RVS, dont force people out of it, it will come naturally.

How?

[Wickedestjr]

Scum duh

If you are serious, then

Unvote Vote: J-Fox

If this wasn't a serious answer, then why didn't you answer seriously? Did you think I was serious or not?

Lol, I wish I was a serial killer; that would be so much fun.

So you aren't an SK? Do you think this post convinces me?

Yes I think I will win,

I mean, town will win lol

Why did you feel the need to add the bolded portion of that post?

Because I only replace into games (one played from start I think). Plus I have talked with a few people in the game, wanted to play with them, so yeah. I never want to play as scum though, its so frustrating to create and keep track of a line of thought.

How would your playstyle change if you were playing as scum in comparison to your play as town?

Is your vote serious?

The reasons I voted for Haylen weren't serious, but I voted her for a serious reason.

Ok now what? :p

What do you think we should do?

The reason I am fine with second is because,

a) I am town so I don't need to be 1st in anything because this is a group effort. (I am such a kiss ass)
b) I have low self esteem and feel I can never get first in anything... ever.

For a.), if you don't need to be first, then why did you say "I am the best scum/town player ever!!!!" ?

For b.), if you have a low self esteem, then why did you say "I am the best scum/town player ever!!!!" ?

These Mafia games are pretty fun. I don't think we are almost ready to start discussing seriously, that part makes people enjoy the beginning part of the game more, so I'd let folks get that joking part out of their system, and eventually serious discussion comes out of it.

What would you do if everybody continued to joke around for about 6-7 pages or so? Would you still wait? What would you do if you didn't wait?

I usually withold my vote until the joking phase is over.

Which do you think benefits the town more, not voting in the RVS, or voting in the RVS? (and don't say that the two are equal). Also, if everybody withheld their random votes, what do you think would happen?

Also, Katniss, how much mafia experience do you have?

No, he would have RVSed someone else, someone w/ mre votes if he erally wanted to wagon.

Not serious at all.

What was the point of the comment if it wasn't serious? It kind of looks like grasping at straws followed by backtracking.

/s proceeds tos dos quicks res-reads

This looks like an attempt to appear helpful, because I don't really see what purpose one would have for re-reading the thread at this stage of the game. Also, why did you need to tell us this?

Right now, I'm looking at Torqez and Crueknight. They both voted for Furry. Both were bandwagon votes.

How do you know they were bandwagon votes?

Not that bandwagoning is automatically a scum sign, but he has hopped on to two so far, which isn't really "random." And it's all I got to work with right now.

As for Torqez, his vote on Furry, was both a Bandwagon and OMGUS Vote. Again, Bandwagon votes, aren't an automatic scum sign, but it's all I got to work from right now.

What is wrong with bandwagoning? Also, why don't you vote for them if it's the best thing you've got?

Damn I hate being in the spotlight in the beginning all the time.

One person FoSes him, and he feels like he's "in the spotlight." I see no reason for a person to hate being in the spotlight anyway.

FoS: CrueKnight

.


Sorry for the long post. They will get shorter once we are out of the RVS. Consider that additional motivation to get us out of the RVS.

[Wickedestjr]

Questions that were never answered;

No, I like the RVS, dont force people out of it, it will come naturally.

How?

CrueKnight - Do you believe Haylen's claim?

cruelty - How many scumbuddies do you have apart from Mr. Squirrel?

YamiJoey - Why did you take so long to confirm? Were you discussing tactics with your scumbuddies?

Scott Brosius - Who do you think is more likely to be scum: malpascp or SolemnJ?

Mr. Squirrel - Are you good at scumhunting? Should I keep my expectations high?

Torqez - What do you think of Furry's vote for you?

VistaSoldier - Which one of these four players is most likely to be scum and which is most likely to be town and give reasons for both;

Scott Brosius
cruelty
Torqez
Katniss

[Wickedestjr]

Questions that were never answered;

No, I like the RVS, dont force people out of it, it will come naturally.

How?

Magic!

Can you show me a game where players got out of the RVS without trying to?

Did you consider your vote part of the RVS, or an end to the RVS?

Neither. It wasn't really part of the RVS I don't think, because it was an attempt to push us out of the RVS. It also didn't end the RVS.

1: I didn't answer seriously because I wanted to see what you'd say if I said I was scum. 2: Your answer is a quite good one.

1: That didn't seem like what you were trying to do when you responded. Also, your response didn't seem to have a serious intention behind it;

Scum duh

Wait, did I say that out loud?? Sh-

It looks like you were trying to make it obvious that you were joking, which would defeat the purpose of your reason for responding in that manner. So it looks to me like you are lying, and I'm liking my vote more.


2: How so?

Wicked, what the hell is with all these questions? If you were asking anything useful, I wouldn't be complaining, but half of these are completely pointless or can be answered if you would just read the thread. For example:

CrueKnight - Do you believe Haylen's claim?

I don't think anyone believes her claim. IF they do, then they can't tell a joke when they read it.

I don't regret asking the questions I did. I think that as long as they are game-related, they will help contribute to the discussion, no matter how stupid they are. For example, you thought my questions were stupid so you make this complain which started a serious discussion between us which is good.

cruelty - How many scumbuddies do you have apart from Mr. Squirrel?

Are you accusing he and I of being scum based only on the RVS? I'm assuming this question is asked in the hopes that cruelty will answer in an extremely stupid way and give away his alignment, but srsly? I think even the worst scum player on earth, if asked this question, would know not answer it.

I'm not going to explain until cruelty answers the question.

Mr. Squirrel - Are you good at scumhunting? Should I keep my expectations high?

Does it matter?

Nope. I didn't really want you to respond.

Please answer the question.

How would your playstyle change if you were playing as scum in comparison to your play as town?

*facepalm*
Ummmm...maybe in the fact that if you are scum you have completely different objectives than if you are town. Did you really need to ask this question?

Obviously. I was hoping he would respond by explaining the difference in the way he plays as scum vs. town. I was hoping for a brief description of his metas.

The reasons I voted for Haylen weren't serious, but I voted her for a serious reason.

This makes absolutely no sense, but then again, neither does anything else you say.

I can understand why you would misunderstand that. I meant that the reasons I voted for Haylen were serious ones, but I voted for her for a serious

purpose.

Hopefully that clears that up.

I really hope all of these questions are just a desperate attempt to end the RVS. If you are gonna be asking things like this all game, I'm just not gonna read your posts.

When we are discussing seriously, I will not question every little thing that people say. All of my game related questions will be serious. Are you glad that I am attempting to get us out of the RVS, or do you think I just shouldn't have ever tried?

[Wickedestjr]

Wicked, are you wicked IRL???

Sometimes.

Are you really what you look in your avatar?

No.

Are you a guy?

Yes. Look at the blue arrow under my avatar.

CK, what was the purpose of asking these questions?

Wickedestjr: Just to reiterate, what Mr. Squirrel said. Really, what is with all these questions. Alot of them, are basically noise posts, that aren't very useful in rooting out scum, and have no real effect on the game. Maybe it's your attempt to appear as if you are helping out the town, by posting all these (albeit: filler) questions. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you are merely trying to help end the RVS, and get some kind of read on everyone.

I'm going to answer the questions that are ueseful for the game, rather than the ones that ask (What would you do if: X happened?)

See my response to Mr. Squirrel.

What is it then if it isn't bandwagoning? Torqez and Crueknight both voted the same player, in quick succession without independent reasons. The only other possible explanation I can think of, is that the votes are attributed to a 'rookie mistake' as I've seen happen in a couple games before.

Let me rephrase that question. Do you think CK and Torqez were deliberately trying to help a bandwagon or were just randomly voting?

Nothing is necessarily 'wrong' with bandwagoning, but mafia do use that as a tactic to pile up votes on a person, for a quick lynch. On the other hand, as seen in this day 1 it appears to be a good thing, because it can start up more serious discussion.

I'm not going to get into an argument with you about whether bandwagoning is good or not, but usually bandwagons are good for the town, even if they are random bandwagons in the RVS.

I'm also giving them a chance to defend themselves, so I can get an accurate read, before using my vote.

Why? You are allowed to vote and unvote as much as you want. Wouldn't you get a better read by pressuring them with a vote before they answer?

2. The line between the two is how valid I feel the suspicion.

I sense a contradiction. You want to get out of the RVS badly, yet you don't vote for somebody when they are worthy of an FoS, when none of the other options for a vote you have shown any interest in. Why?

@Wickedestjr:

The point was to note it and see what the town thought of it. My overall TONE in that post was not serious.

I tell you what I'm going to do b/c I'm methodical like that. If you could metagame me, you'd see that that's just what I do. I'll post my thoughts when I have valid suspicions.

What was this in response to? Also, I asked more than just one question to you. Please answer them all.

[Wickedestjr]

Dislike the ideas of Furry chainsaw defending CK. First of all, it isn't even chainsawing. Second of all, we don't know the allignment of either one of them. Third of all, Furry seems pretty pro-town.

[Wickedestjr]

I disagree. Asking stupid questions just spams up the thread and distracts us from any real evidence that other players might have or any scummy actions of theirs.

Haven't I been pointing out the things I think are scummy? What is wrong with those things I pointed out? I don't think the questions are distracting, and I don't think they are bad either. Please tell me a good question you would have asked at the time, or tell me some scummy actions that the town missed because of my questions.

Plus, it just makes you look stupid and detracts from any credibility I give your posts in the future.

I think you are over-exaggerating this.

Mr. Squirrel - Are you good at scumhunting? Should I keep my expectations high?

Does it matter?

Nope. I didn't really want you to respond.

Please answer the question.

I refuse. Whether or not I am good at scumhunting will be seen by my actions in game. Besides, that is a loaded question. If I say yes, you will forever hound my posts and if I ever slack in my scunhunting you say that I am scum who is not trying to help the town. On the other hand, if I answer that I'm not a good scumhunter, you will just say that I'm scum trying to set your expectations low so that you don't suspect me later on.

Just for that,

vote wicked

Okay. I can see why you didn't respond to the question, but I don't see how anything bad would have happened if you had answered it.

I really hope all of these questions are just a desperate attempt to end the RVS. If you are gonna be asking things like this all game, I'm just not gonna read your posts.

When we are discussing seriously, I will not question every little thing that people say. All of my game related questions will be serious. Are you glad that I am attempting to get us out of the RVS, or do you think I just shouldn't have ever tried?

I'm glad we are leaving the RVS, but I don't think your questions are at all the proper way to do it.

Me asking those questions resulted in you criticizing them. This followed with me and you arguing about it, followed by you giving me a serious vote. Now we have gotten serious. So I believe it was because of my questions. Also, I recently finished a game where I asked a question that you'd probably call "bad" that started the discussion. I can link you to it if you want.

Also, I find it funny how you complain about how bad my questions are and how they don't help to get us out of the RVS, yet you aren't even helping to get us out of the RVS.

Also, I find it funny how you complained about my questions possibly distracting people from scummy things that other people do, yet have focused your whole attention on me, so you obviously aren't concerned about what other people are doing.

For those two things I'm going to

Unvote Vote: Mr. Squirrel

.

[Wickedestjr]

G2g. I'll finish catching up when I'm back.

[Wickedestjr]

Wickedest, some of your questions right now, on people who haven't done anything suspicious, seem like a distraction, to keep from actual scumhunting. This in itself seems suspicious. I can see the build-up you are using to discredit and make people like myself seem scummy, in my case the fact that I FoS people instead of voting on someone.

My only intention with those questions was to start discussion. The main reason they start discussion is because people react to them in a strange way. Sometimes it works best if the questions are ones that make players feel threatened or pressured. This way the reactions are more telling. Also, keep in mind I didn't have anything to work with at the time I asked those questions. So, could you give examples of questions that would be more beneficial that I could have asked at the time?

SolemnJ at this point. The SK comment rubbed me the wrong way in his first post.

Did you know that the SK comment was in response to my first question directed at him?


@J-Fox, Scott, and Furry - What do you think of my vote for Mr. Squirrel?

[Wickedestjr]

Anybody?

[Wickedestjr]

I wonder why Haylen and Scott have been ignoring this thread. They've been posting in other ones.

[Wickedestjr]

If you don't have any time to post anything, then you can at least tell us.

[Wickedestjr]

How many games are you in Haylen?

[Wickedestjr]

A bullet point case from each would be nice, as once quote wars expand they tend to slowly drift away from the epicenter of the arguement (especially if good scum is on the defensive) and onto less important things.

-Says the questions have been distracting the town from scummy things that other players have been doing, even though I have been paying attention to everyone and I even directed one question to each player in the game.

-Says my questions will detract from any credibility that he'll give my posts, which I think is an unneccessary over-exaggeration.

-Tries to accuse me of asking a loaded question, which would have been a dumb idea, because it would have made me look bad.

-Says my questions aren't helping even though they started this whole argument.

-He complains about how bad my quetions are and how they don't help get us out of the RVS, yet he doesn't even seem to be trying to help us get out of the RVS.

-He complains about my questions being distracting.
I don't think this is actually a concern of his, because he has been focusing all his attention on me. All his serious posts prior to my vote for him have been directed at me.

Is there any other reason you guys got a vote on me?

I'm not voting you, but can you respond to this;

/s proceeds tos dos quicks res-reads

This looks like an attempt to appear helpful, because I don't really see what purpose one would have for re-reading the thread at this stage of the game. Also, why did you need to tell us this?

Hm.

I am still leaning a little bit on wickedestjr

, but he has responded very reasonably in defending his actions.

To answer his question, I probably couldn't think of a question right off the bat, so no

.

FoS: Katniss

What are your reasons for finding me suspcious still then? Earlier you said it was because you didn't like the questions I was asking, yet, now you say you couldn't think of any better questions for me to have asked.

Personally, my vote on him is based almost entirely on the question he asked of me: "Are you good at scumhunting". While his questioning in general is rather annoying, it is not necessarily scummy. Then again, I've never played a game where someone asked a sh*tload of questions that anyone with a 3rd grade reading level could easily answer, so I really don't have any previous circumstance to compare his behavior to.

I offered to link a game for you in which I asked questions like these.


Lol. Mr. Squirrel's case against me consists of all the things I

might

do in response to his answer to a question I asked. I never actually did anything scummy, but he feels that I was setting up to get him lynched. How is that a valid case?

Also;

It was at this point that I realized that there was no way to gracefully answer this question without causing irreparable harm to my reputation for the remainder of this game.

This is another unnecessary over-exaggeration. Please explain how your answer would cause irreparable harm to your reputation. Because if I actuallly attacked you for your answer, it would make

me

look bad. Also please respond to post 128, unless you know I'm right.


@Furry, another point for my case against Mr. Squirrel;

-Makes a case that consists of what I could do, instead of what I have done.

[Wickedestjr]

Hm.

I am still leaning a little bit on wickedestjr

, but he has responded very reasonably in defending his actions.

To answer his question, I probably couldn't think of a question right off the bat, so no

.

FoS: Katniss

What are your reasons for finding me suspcious still then? Earlier you said it was because you didn't like the questions I was asking, yet, now you say you couldn't think of any better questions for me to have asked.

*sigh*

Yes,

earlier

I said I didnt like your questions, but that changed

later

. It was

later

that you gave good responses as to why you had made those questions, and I ended up thinking they were very reasonable, so looking back on it I figured that I may have been wrong about you

earlier

and as a result, I unvoted you, and thought of you as less suspicious. That 'little bit' part of my post was basically just my gut left over suspicions of you. As I said, it was only a 'little bit', so I wasn't feeling very strong in my suspicion against you.

Now I answer your question, and you twist it around to make me look scummy. To explain myself, I couldn't think of a question right off the bat, as in right now, because it's difficult to think of a question, when you aren't "in the moment" at the time, you had asked yours, then.

===

I guess, I'll do a quick lookback at your questions...

I'm reading now, and I see that some of your questions earlier were "what would you do if

X

happened?" About my playstyle, skill, and how I would handle the RVS stage and everyone joking. I viewed these questions as, more of a distraction, that didn't really have much use in helping find mafia.

I then, as I've posted earlier, only answered questions, questioning my theory on certain people who might be scum. Now

those

were somewhat better questions that could help decide if those people were or were not mafia.

Then you explained, later, that you were really just using these questions to get reads on everyone you were asking the questions to. Which, again, was a very resonable answer. I believed you.

===

Fair enough.

Now I'm starting to see things a bit differently again. Your question of "What questions I would ask" was another question that doesn't help contribute in searching for mafia, which I ended up, answering anyway, just for the sake of it, which I answered honestly as I could. I thought, it would be the end of that, but apparently not. Instead I get FoS'd for it. In retrospect, it looks that it may have been a set-up, designed to twist any answer I would have given to make me look scummy. Or if not, (I'm basing this off of patterns I'm seeing in your interactions with me and other people) more questions would be asked, about the answers, leading on a never-ending back and forth question/answer debate, leading to nowhere, or until someone makes a mistake of saying something, that you could use against them.

Trying to get reads on people with a few decent questions is one thing, but sending a never ending barrage of questions to people (It's kind of difficult for someone, not to focus their attention on you when you keep doing this), some even if answered don't contribute much to the game, is another thing. It makes it look like you aren't really trying to get reads on people, but are really trying to bait people with nonstop questions, until someone bites, and they finally respond to one of the questions in a way, that can be used to make those look like mafia.

I intended to stop asking so many questions once we were out of the RVS, and I doubt that the game would go on with me and another player arguing over something hardly relevant to the game. Also, even though I wasn't intending to twist people's answers, what would be wrong with that?

Katniss, now that you understand my responses and like them, what do you think of Mr. Squirrel still keeping his vote on me?

G2g, I'm sorry I didn't get to finish catching up. I should have enough time tomorrow.

[Wickedestjr]

Also please respond to post 128,

unless you know I'm right.

Baiting? Come on. My vote on you before was very flimsy and I feel that I would have had no problem changing it, but the way you reacted to it leads me to believe that you may in fact be scum. However, you did say please so I feel it would be rude to not answer.

So now one of the main reasons you are keeping my vote is because of that comment? I see no problem with adding that comment, because you should respond to all of my posts directed at you, unless you agree with me.

You know what? I wouldn't have asked any questions at the time. Know why? Because they don't get you out of the RVS. Accusations do. Just throwing out questions (especially ones as shallow as yours) leads to one sentence answers that are easily buried within the pile of random votes and are forgotten for the rest of the game.

So would you have been fine if I had asked better questions? Or do you just find me suspicious for asking any questions at all? And also, you say my questions are "shallow". Please give me some examples of better questions.

And I don't believe a majority of your gameplay has been pointing out scummy things.

You might have commented on a few,

but mainly you have been focusing on these questions that you say are helpful to the game. However these questions help scum just as much as they help town. Asking questions like "who do you think is scummier out of X & Y" are pointless unless the alignment of those two people are currently in question. At the current time, all it does is give scum an early indication of what people's impressions are in the game.

A few suspicious things is enough to comment on, because first of all, those few things were all the things I noticed, and also, how many scummy things are going to occur in the RVS?

Plus, it just makes you look stupid and detracts from any credibility I give your posts in the future.

I think you are over-exaggerating this.

Nope. Not at all.

Okay, then to what extent would my questions detract from any credibility you gave my posts? Please elaborate on that.

Okay. I can see why you didn't respond to the question, but I don't see how anything bad would have happened if you had answered it.

See my post before this.

I did. It was a terrible post.

Me asking those questions resulted in you criticizing them. This followed with me and you arguing about it, followed by you giving me a serious vote. Now we have gotten serious. So I believe it was because of my questions. Also, I recently finished a game where I asked a question that you'd probably call "bad" that started the discussion. I can link you to it if you want.

Also, I find it funny how you complain about how bad my questions are and how they don't help to get us out of the RVS, yet you aren't even helping to get us out of the RVS.

Actually, by calling you out on your questions, I believe I did more to end the RVS than you did. All you did to 'help' was look scummy.

We wouldn't have gotten out of the RVS as quick if I hadn't helped to get us out of the RVS.So I find it scummy how you try to give me zero credit. Also, you didn't respond to the bolded portion.

Also, I find it funny how you complained about my questions possibly distracting people from scummy things that other people do, yet have focused your whole attention on me, so you obviously aren't concerned about what other people are doing.

Right now, no one else in game is giving off the same scum read that you are. For now, I will focus my efforts on you.

Just because I'm supposedly super scummy, that doesn't mean nobody else hasn't done anything scummy. So this is not a good excuse.

For those two things I'm going to Unvote Vote: Mr. Squirrel.

OMGUS

Nope. Not OMGUS. I gave reasons.

-Makes a case that consists of what I could do, instead of what I have done.

If you saw someone with lots of lumber, nails, shingles, tiles, etc. wouldn't you say that they were preparing to build a house? Why then can't I make the assumption that when you have made all the preparations to frame other players that you are indeed intending to do so? Personally, I'd rather catch you before you frame another player rather than after you do so.

But my question for you wasn't intended to "frame" you. Even if I had, it is not like anybody would be stupid enough to agree with me. You could simply bring up your defense. Also I like how you use the word "frame", because the worst thing I could do is badly accuse you, which is not framing.

If you had said that you are good at scumhunting, and I attacked you for getting something wrong, that would not be framing you.

If you had said that you are not good at scum hunting, and I attacked you for keeping my expectations low, that would not be framing you.

This is because framing includes lying about something to persuade people to think another person is scum. However, I wouldn't be lying if I said "he said he's good at scumhunting yet he was just wrong about something. He's scum" or if I said "he said he's bad at scumhunting, so he's trying to keep our expectations low. He's scum", because while both are assumptions, they both revolve around true occurences, which wouldn't be lying about anything. It would just be a bad attack.

[Wickedestjr]

Here... don't like wall posts.

Vote:wicked

1: He seems to be talking really suss and 2: defending himself.

1: I don't really understand this. Can you elaborate?

2: Darn it. He got me. I forgot that defending myself was a scumtell.

Notes for Next Game as Scum

Don't defend against accusations. That would be

reaaaalllly

scummy.

[1: I find you questionable WJ, I'd vote you but I'm uneasy about pushing a wagon this early. So you just get FoSed.] Also your enormous posts with heaps of empty space are very irritating to scroll through for very little content. 2: More conciseness please.

1: For what reasons?

2: No thanks. We are out of the RVS, and I will comment on what I feel the need to comment on.

Squirrel your post 146 is strange. Not going to read into it, but noted for future reference.

Thanks for the useless comment.

vote: Haylen. Bunch of useless posts, no content whatsoever.

In that case, we should be suspicious of you too. Shouldn't we?

FoS: cruelty

(for post 156)

Umm...the game has barely started.

1. We don't know your stance on anything yet.

2. When were you planning on posting content?

3. Why are you ignoring my other questions directed at you?

Well, there's not really much to post about when the game starts is there?

What are your thoughts on me, Mr. Squirrel, and SolemnJ?

Just checkin in

Thanks.

Thoughts on the main subjects of the game?

Lies.

I had a discussion with Wicked about the RVS, which counts as game relevent, and then I did a bit of ridiculous scumhunting too. I'm also right in the middle of a discussion with you about my ''non-participation''. Stop trying to go for an easy lynch >=(

A discussion that completely ended when you stopped responding to my questions.

Also, as for you being such an easy lynch (which you are right about btw), don't make yourself such an easy lynch.

I'm just voting for pressure. I do not have any intentions to lynch you.

Wow. LOL.

HoS: CrueKnight

This is funny.

[Wickedestjr]

Wow. LOL. HoS: CrueKnight This is funny.

What? Why the hell are we voting for anyways?
It's really just a squeeze until you get what you want out of the person.
I don't see what's so funny about that. You don't lynch people this early on. Amirite>?

Why did you tell SolemnJ that it was a pressure vote and that you didn't want him lynched?

[Wickedestjr]

vote: Haylen. Bunch of useless posts, no content whatsoever.

In that case, we should be suspicious of you too. Shouldn't we?

FoS: cruelty

(for post 156)

You could be, if I hadn't been V/LA for a few days as stated very early in the thread. Skim reading is scummy.

I've never been scum, but I assume I'd still read the thread as thoroughly as town. The FoS was because I wasn't too impressed with your catch-up post. Don't use your vacation as an excuse for your lack of content. There is nothing stopping you from making a good post. Not even a vacation.

[Wickedestjr]

@WarWound - I suggest you skip the confirmation stage. That'll knock off some posts that are irrelevant to the game. But the thread is not that long anyway. If you knew you were replacing in you could have followed this game.

1: I think telling him he is being pressured won't do any harm or dilute the effects.

2: I still think he should explain why he misquoted.

1: Yes it does. The point of a pressure vote is to pressure people. If you are town, then you need to make it seem like you really think that person is scum so they actually feel pressured. If you admit that it is just a pressure vote and you don't want them lynched, then the scum aren't going to feel as pressured. Don't you agree? How can you pressure a person by saying you are voting them just for pressure?

2: Where did he misquote?

Need to get caught up, but this is a fail of a HoS. Pressure votes work wonders. People play differently under pressure

I know, but he shouldn't say its a pressure vote.

Starting a wagon somewhat vaugely is a great way to catch a player off guard, saying its for pressure kind of defeats the purpose though.

Then why did you call my HoS bad?


Warwound, an HoS is a Hand of Suspicion.

Hahaha.


There's very little being said right now that I feel compelled to comment on. Most of the thread seems to be taken up by your wall posts which are ironically light on content and heavy on the enter key.

Then why are you voting Haylen for her limited content?

Also, interesting softclaim in the quote above.

Where? By saying "I've never been scum before,..." ? This is my ninth game on mafiascum. I am dead in all eight of my other games. In all eight of those games I was town alligned. You can look. This game I am also town. So I have never been scum. No soft claim. Do you even know what a soft claim is?

1: If you looked at the context, all I wanted was for him to explain the situation.
2: As for why I told him is because he asked. :p But still, it won't stop him from explaining. Well, maybe I shouldn't have told that to him.
But it wasn't my goal anyways to sneak up and ambush him.

1: So that was the only reason? Because in Post 173, you say it was

just

a pressure vote. Why all the flip-flopping?

2: No he didn't. He said;

Your reason for voting me is bull, I repeat. /maintains vote.

And then you claimed it was a pressure vote in response to this. Also, even though SolemnJ didn't ask for reasons for you voting him, whenever a person does, don't say "it was a pressure vote." You explain why you have that suspicion.


I think I'll

Unvote Vote: CrueKnight

. I still suspect Mr. Squirrel, but CrueKnight needs to do some explaining.






4:

[Wickedestjr]

He said my reason was bull, avoiding my demand to explain why he misquoted... or falsely claimed something.
I repeated, I wanted him to explain. After seeing his previous response, it sounded if he thought I was going to lynch him or something. At least that's how I looked at it since he said his vote on me remains.

Which post seemed he thought you were going to lynch him? What made you draw that conclusion from that post?

Also, what is wrong with him thinking you want him lynched?

I thought it was harmless, and friendly to tell him the reason for my vote.

You can say your reasons for voting. You just shouldn't tell us your motivation for voting (such as pressure, to lynch, etc.)

But my ONE AND ONLY PURPOSE out of this whole thing was to get him to explain some stuff and not just call it a bullshit argument.

Then why did you say it was just a pressure vote?

please excuse my dear bbcode mess up.

I will if you promise to preview your posts. Deal?

unvote Vote: CrueKnight

You really got angry about having 2 votes on you

Can you elaborate on that? Where did he get angry? What made you think it was anger? Also, is anger a scumtell?

Hahaha.


There's very little being said right now that I feel compelled to comment on. Most of the thread seems to be taken up by your wall posts which are ironically light on content and heavy on the enter key.

Then why are you voting Haylen for her limited content?

Haylen doesn't have limited content. Haylen has

no

content. This is worth a vote.

You aren't helping any more than she is. You have one attempt at a good post. Your attack is hypocritical. Also, is it a scumtell to not post any content? How much experience with mafia do you have?


@Katniss - What do you think of my vote for Mr. Squirrel?

My vote for him was simple because of this. People were suspecting him for his strange posting etc. And he comes up with a post, which I believe has too much "solid" defending himself. And even though that's not too bad, with all those "bull"s in there, he's obviously under some stress to defend himself. I smell mafia.

I smell a bad case.

I decided, to

Vote: Crueknight

, due to several cases brought against him, and my earlier suspicions/case against

I am still not nearly confident as I would like and I really hope I'm doing the right thing here.

Which reasoning do you agree with?

[Wickedestjr]

HoS: VistaSoldier

1. He made terrible cases against both me and CrueKnight. Both of which are starting to look like bandwagon votes.

2. I responded to his reasons for voting me, and he hasn't replied. He just changed his vote. I think he is trying to avoid having to respond.


Also

IGMEO Katniss

. His wishi-washiness is a bit too much for my liking. Also, there is something else I noticed, but I'm waiting for his next post.


@Furry - What did you think of my case against Mr. Squirrel. I remember you asking about them earlier, and you only made a comment regarding Mr. Squirrel's case against me. Also, can you please say who you agree with the most please?

[Wickedestjr]

Also, some serious questions I want responses to;

Yes I think I will win,

I mean, town will win lol

Why did you feel the need to add the bolded portion of that post?

I usually withold my vote until the joking phase is over.

Which do you think benefits the town more, not voting in the RVS, or voting in the RVS? (and don't say that the two are equal). Also, if everybody withheld their random votes, what do you think would happen?

Also, Katniss, how much mafia experience do you have?

/s proceeds tos dos quicks res-reads

This looks like an attempt to appear helpful, because I don't really see what purpose one would have for re-reading the thread at this stage of the game. Also, why did you need to tell us this?

Damn I hate being in the spotlight in the beginning all the time.

One person FoSes him, and he feels like he's "in the spotlight." I see no reason for a person to hate being in the spotlight anyway.

1: I didn't answer seriously because I wanted to see what you'd say if I said I was scum. 2: Your answer is a quite good one.

1: That didn't seem like what you were trying to do when you responded. Also, your response didn't seem to have a serious intention behind it;

Scum duh

Wait, did I say that out loud?? Sh-

It looks like you were trying to make it obvious that you were joking, which would defeat the purpose of your reason for responding in that manner. So it looks to me like you are lying, and I'm liking my vote more.


2: How so?



CK, what was the purpose of asking those questions earlier?

2. The line between the two is how valid I feel the suspicion.

I sense a contradiction. You want to get out of the RVS badly, yet you don't vote for somebody when they are worthy of an FoS, when none of the other options for a vote you have shown any interest in. Why?


@J-Fox - What do you think of my earlier vote for Mr. Squirrel?

Personally, my vote on him is based almost entirely on the question he asked of me: "Are you good at scumhunting". While his questioning in general is rather annoying, it is not necessarily scummy. Then again, I've never played a game where someone asked a sh*tload of questions that anyone with a 3rd grade reading level could easily answer, so I really don't have any previous circumstance to compare his behavior to.

I offered to link a game for you in which I asked questions like these.

It was at this point that I realized that there was no way to gracefully answer this question without causing irreparable harm to my reputation for the remainder of this game.

This is another unnecessary over-exaggeration. Please explain how your answer would cause irreparable harm to your reputation. Because if I actuallly attacked you for your answer, it would make

me

look bad. Also please respond to post 128, unless you know I'm right.

Also please respond to post 128,

unless you know I'm right.

Baiting? Come on. My vote on you before was very flimsy and I feel that I would have had no problem changing it, but the way you reacted to it leads me to believe that you may in fact be scum. However, you did say please so I feel it would be rude to not answer.

So now one of the main reasons you are keeping my vote is because of that comment? I see no problem with adding that comment, because you should respond to all of my posts directed at you, unless you agree with me.

You know what? I wouldn't have asked any questions at the time. Know why? Because they don't get you out of the RVS. Accusations do. Just throwing out questions (especially ones as shallow as yours) leads to one sentence answers that are easily buried within the pile of random votes and are forgotten for the rest of the game.

So would you have been fine if I had asked better questions? Or do you just find me suspicious for asking any questions at all? And also, you say my questions are "shallow". Please give me some examples of better questions.

And I don't believe a majority of your gameplay has been pointing out scummy things.

You might have commented on a few,

but mainly you have been focusing on these questions that you say are helpful to the game. However these questions help scum just as much as they help town. Asking questions like "who do you think is scummier out of X & Y" are pointless unless the alignment of those two people are currently in question. At the current time, all it does is give scum an early indication of what people's impressions are in the game.

A few suspicious things is enough to comment on, because first of all, those few things were all the things I noticed, and also, how many scummy things are going to occur in the RVS?

Plus, it just makes you look stupid and detracts from any credibility I give your posts in the future.

I think you are over-exaggerating this.

Nope. Not at all.

Okay, then to what extent would my questions detract from any credibility you gave my posts? Please elaborate on that.

Okay. I can see why you didn't respond to the question, but I don't see how anything bad would have happened if you had answered it.

See my post before this.

I did. It was a terrible post.

Me asking those questions resulted in you criticizing them. This followed with me and you arguing about it, followed by you giving me a serious vote. Now we have gotten serious. So I believe it was because of my questions. Also, I recently finished a game where I asked a question that you'd probably call "bad" that started the discussion. I can link you to it if you want.

Also, I find it funny how you complain about how bad my questions are and how they don't help to get us out of the RVS, yet you aren't even helping to get us out of the RVS.

Actually, by calling you out on your questions, I believe I did more to end the RVS than you did. All you did to 'help' was look scummy.

We wouldn't have gotten out of the RVS as quick if I hadn't helped to get us out of the RVS.So I find it scummy how you try to give me zero credit. Also, you didn't respond to the bolded portion.

Also, I find it funny how you complained about my questions possibly distracting people from scummy things that other people do, yet have focused your whole attention on me, so you obviously aren't concerned about what other people are doing.

Right now, no one else in game is giving off the same scum read that you are. For now, I will focus my efforts on you.

Just because I'm supposedly super scummy, that doesn't mean nobody else hasn't done anything scummy. So this is not a good excuse.

For those two things I'm going to Unvote Vote: Mr. Squirrel.

OMGUS

Nope. Not OMGUS. I gave reasons.

-Makes a case that consists of what I could do, instead of what I have done.

If you saw someone with lots of lumber, nails, shingles, tiles, etc. wouldn't you say that they were preparing to build a house? Why then can't I make the assumption that when you have made all the preparations to frame other players that you are indeed intending to do so? Personally, I'd rather catch you before you frame another player rather than after you do so.

But my question for you wasn't intended to "frame" you. Even if I had, it is not like anybody would be stupid enough to agree with me. You could simply bring up your defense. Also I like how you use the word "frame", because the worst thing I could do is badly accuse you, which is not framing.

If you had said that you are good at scumhunting, and I attacked you for getting something wrong, that would not be framing you.

If you had said that you are not good at scum hunting, and I attacked you for keeping my expectations low, that would not be framing you.

This is because framing includes lying about something to persuade people to think another person is scum. However, I wouldn't be lying if I said "he said he's good at scumhunting yet he was just wrong about something. He's scum" or if I said "he said he's bad at scumhunting, so he's trying to keep our expectations low. He's scum", because while both are assumptions, they both revolve around true occurences, which wouldn't be lying about anything. It would just be a bad attack.

Vote:wicked

1: He seems to be talking really suss and 2: defending himself.

1: I don't really understand this. Can you elaborate?

2: Darn it. He got me. I forgot that defending myself was a scumtell.

Notes for Next Game as Scum

Don't defend against accusations. That would be

reaaaalllly

scummy.

I find you questionable WJ, I'd vote you but I'm uneasy about pushing a wagon this early. So you just get FoSed.

For what reasons?

Umm...the game has barely started.

1. We don't know your stance on anything yet.

2. When were you planning on posting content?

3. Why are you ignoring my other questions directed at you?

Well, there's not really much to post about when the game starts is there?

What are your thoughts on me, Mr. Squirrel, and SolemnJ?


malpascp, what do you think of the main subjects of the game?

I still think he should explain why he misquoted.

Where did he misquote?

Starting a wagon somewhat vaugely is a great way to catch a player off guard, saying its for pressure kind of defeats the purpose though.

Then why did you call my HoS bad?

Also, interesting softclaim in the quote above.

Where? By saying "I've never been scum before,..." ? This is my ninth game on mafiascum. I am dead in all eight of my other games. In all eight of those games I was town alligned. You can look. This game I am also town. So I have never been scum. No soft claim. Do you even know what a soft claim is?

[Wickedestjr]

Need to get caught up, but this is a fail of a HoS. Pressure votes work wonders. People play differently under pressure

I know, but he shouldn't say its a pressure vote.

Starting a wagon somewhat vaugely is a great way to catch a player off guard, saying its for pressure kind of defeats the purpose though.

Then why did you call my HoS bad?

Because it was someone making a pressure vote that drew it out... you agree with me that pressure votes are good, so why apply pressure to someone using one (even if they failed to correctly). Right now I fail to get a good analogy going (for some reason im trying to apply it to a knife fight... and cant stop doing so) but, it makes no sense to me.

I'm sorry. I don't really understand this explanation.

Also CK wagon is weaker then... a butter knife at a knife fight? Yeah that will do.

Why?

Ok. I'll bite and answer these questions,

hopefully to prove I am not mafia

.

There is something wrong with this, but I can't figure out what it is.

You voted on him for these two reasons:

"Also, I find it funny how you complain about how bad my questions are and how they don't help to get us out of the RVS, yet you aren't even helping to get us out of the RVS.

Also, I find it funny how you complained about my questions possibly distracting people from scummy things that other people do, yet have focused your whole attention on me, so you obviously aren't concerned about what other people are doing. "

I pretty much disagreed with you on that. I had a similar mindset on you back then, with the spitfire questions you were giving. Note, just because I am agreeing with someone doesn't mean I am aligned with them. I am not aligned with Squirrel, other than if he is also a townie. I hope this isn't leading to a mafia connection between the two of us.

Looking back on it, I am thinking your vote was a pressure vote, to try and accurate read on him.

First of all, I gave a list of reasons in Post 149. Please read it and tell me what you think.

Second of all, can you elaborate on your thoughts because I don't understand why you disagree with my case.

Thirdly, where did I say that you and Mr. Squirrel were alligned?

Fourthly, my vote was completely serious. Not just for pressure.

Well, it was mostly due to people saying his reasonings of voting for someone saying simply "It was a pressure vote" was a pretty bad reasoning in defending himself.

But do you agree? Do you think that it was a good idea for him to say it was for pressure? Also, do you agree that it makes him look scummy? (you can just answer Yes or No to those questions)

[1: I know, I know, it's not a very good case, but it added to my earlier suspicions on him.] Darn now I feel even more uncomfortable with my votes. I feel like unvoting now, but that leads to your next statement.

Also IGMEO Katniss. His wishi-washiness is a bit too much for my liking. Also, there is something else I noticed, but I'm waiting for his next post.

2: People made it clear to me that I can vote and unvote someone at any time, especially since votes apply more pressure than a FoS, so that's what I am doing. Apparantley using FoS wasn't a good thing, when I used it earlier.

1: What? Then why was your main reason for voting him something that came from my case?

2: Well, voting is better than FoSes, but FoSing is always good too if you already have your vote on somebody else. Switching your vote around all the time is not really very helpful, unless you have good reasons for doing so. This late in the game, you should have some solid opinions.

I like to use the FoS, because I didn't want to appear as if I was being too wishy washy. That way if my mind changes on a player, then I don't look suspicious by voting or unvoting too much. My mind changes often in this game, like when I feel I am not too sure on someone, or if a person's posts were good enough to change my mind for the better, or fishy enough to change my mind for the worse. This is what happened for me, for you.

Why do you care if you look wishywashy? Why do you care about looking suspicious? Also, how do FoSes prevent you from looking wishywashy?

Also I heard something about smilies. You can't use smilies now, because they make you suspicious? What the heck? you can't do alot in this game with the FoS shunning and now the "hiding behind smilies" I really like smilies, and a bit of joking around, because it helps lighten the mood, and making me a bit happier, that it's only a game, instead of getting me annoyed with things being said. Now you take that away from me too. That sucks.

I don't know what this is in response to, but sometimes players use more emoticons as scum, because they think lightening the mood might distract from the suspicious things they do. You shouldn't care about it if you are town....


...Speaking of which, I am concerned with how Katniss is bothered about how he appears to the rest of the town. This could merit a vote, but he seems slightly inexperienced, which could have an effect on it. Also, I can't help but think he might not say those kind of things as scum. For now I'll just be watching Katniss more closely.

[Wickedestjr]

Ok. I'll bite and answer these questions, hopefully to prove I am not mafia.

I dislike this comment. Answer them to stimulate discussion and scumhunt. Also rarely is anything ever "proven" in this game, so attempting to do that answering questions makes no sense.

I agree with this comment.


I don't like the reason Scott gave for his vote. I don't think it is a strong reason. I think there are more suspicious actions that have taken place, even from Katniss.

I'm simply trying to state why I wanted to vote CrueKnight and did not come round to replying to you.

Why didn't you reply to me.

1: Although yes, my vote on you was pretty bad. 2: I'm really easily pursuaded, so yeah, after 2 people voted you, I instantly got suspicious and didn't need much of a nudge.

1: What changed your mind about it?

2: The problem is I don't see why a townie would be so easily persuaded. Also, you say that you voted me because of the reasons that others gave, which you agreed with at the time, however, I don't recall any of your reasons coming from anybody else's case.

Unvote Vote: VistaSoldier

until he provides a good explanation. I find his actions scummier than CrueKnight's.

Wicked can you explain why you keep bringing up how experienced you are at mafia? There's no good reason except to imply superiority/establish a leadership role.

Where have I brought this up?

Haylen, you still haven't contributed. A half-assed answer and some bullshit about spoiler tags is not contribution. My vote stands.

Ok. Let's put it this way. I'll give you a riddle. You're in a game on page ten that is nowhere near deadline. You're in another game, you're at L-1 as is another guy, everybody is voting and you have less that 24 hours to convince somebody to change their vote from yourself to the other guy. Where do you concentrate your efforts for those 24 hours?

How much time will you be spending there? Also, why did you sign up for another game if you can't spend enough time on them all?

@wicked: votes dont end the RVS; thinking does.

Fair enough. Can you please answer the other question I asked you? You have avoided it long enough.


I really like post 232. Those excuses are inconsistent. I normally don't think non-contribution is a scumtell, but her excuses don't seem to fit.

HoS: Haylen

.

I like post 233 as well.

Haylen seems to be getting much worse. Even though she has posted so many times in this thread, she won't even defend herself. Also, I find it odd that she said she was going to re-read, which means she had already read the thread, which means she knows what is going on, yet still doesn't post any content.

[Wickedestjr]

Deathnote, what are your thoughts on Haylen and cruelty?

[Wickedestjr]

/s proceeds tos dos quicks res-reads

This looks like an attempt to appear helpful, because I don't really see what purpose one would have for re-reading the thread at this stage of the game. Also, why did you need to tell us this?


The question above is the one I have been waiting for an answer to.


Also, I must have missed 237, but... wow.

[Wickedestjr]

I found the game that Haylen was talking about. The funny thing is, it is in night time right now. In fact, the night in that game started before she made these posts;

I was fucking defending myself. That's the whole point of the damn game.

vote cruelty

Strawmanning and misrep.

PS Haylen doesnt do OMGUS.

So... When should we expect some content? Also, she has said that she has read the thread, so why hasn't she posted any content? Also, I find it hard to believe that she can't make any time for this game. Why did she even join so many games? VistaSoldier still remains a big suspect of mine, but I would like Haylen to come out and do something and explain the inconsistincies.

Unvote Vote: Haylen

[Wickedestjr]

Umm...you do realise that A LOT of players dont post during the weekend? And that I haven't posted in ANY of my games over the past 2 days, including the one I'm modding? hmm...gotta do a few votecounts there.

Who cares? You made posts on November 13th that had no content, but were after you lynched somebody in the game where you were in danger. Or at least that is what the time shows when I look at it. That must have either been Friday or Saturday for you depending on what time zone you are in. If it had been Friday, then you could have posted more content. Also, please respond to the quotes below;

So... When should we expect some content? Also, she has said that she has read the thread, so why hasn't she posted any content? Also, I find it hard to believe that she can't make any time for this game.

Also, opinions would be nice because you have given none.

In fact, you are able to defend yourself pretty well, but when it comes to scumhunting or just contributing...your posts have less of this and more of spam.

Because I really want to see what you have to say. Also @ Post 239 - defending yourself is not the whole point of the game unless you are scum. So did you just slip? Also, if defending yourself is the whole point, then why haven't you responded to the quotes above?

My first thoughts are that Wicked and Cruelty seem to be finding every little thing they can to cast suspicion on me.

Really? I can understand you feeling this way about cruelty if you actually think his points are inaccurate, but it is a huge over-exaggeration to accuse me of this. I may unvote if you responded, but I haven't seen any defense against the points I really care about at this point.

Yes, you found that game...did you read it? Did you notice how easy it is to get me lynched? I think that the fact you would know I'm an easy target from that and you're going after me suggests a scumtell.

This is a huge misrep. Also, it looks like OMGUS. Why the heck would I have read the whole game? I would only need to see the last post to know when the night began. You don't even know if I read that game or not, and I didn't.

I needed a break this weekend so I could go and visit my cousin. She's 3 months old, with a hole in her heart. She means the world to me, I've been distraught since I found out, and seeing her on friday was overwhelmingly distressing.

Sorry.


Also, I love how Haylen hasn't given her stance on anything yet.


@SolemnJ - Fair enough.
@DeathNote - The case against Haylen isn't just non contribution.


Oh, and one more thing that I didn't catch before. SolemnJ asked CrueKnight if he had forgotten the reasons for voting and CrueKnight said he thinks he did. So CrueKnight, why are you still voting SolemnJ?

[Wickedestjr]

I like the vote for Furry. I case votes all the time that are mainly for pressure.

I'm also beginning to get some good reads on players. Here is my list;

People I'd Be Willing to Lynch:

Wickedestjr

- He is incredibly scummy. I just don't know if others feel the same way.

Furry

- SolemnJ's case combined with gut both make be suspicious of Furry.

VistaSoldier

- See my reasons for voting him earlier.

Katniss

- I don't like his wishy-washiness. Also, there is something else I noticed, but his most recent post in response to me didn't give me enough evidence regarding it. I'm waiting for his next good post.

People That May be Good Lynch Choices:

CrueKnight

- My earlier case.

Haylen

- See my last few posts in response to Haylen.

Unsure Of, But Have Minor Suspicions:

malpascp

- His posts are wierd and unhelpful.

Torqez

- His posts are a bit strange also and unhelpful.

Mr. Squirrel

- I still have minor suspicions of him after the arguing we had earlier.

[Wickedestjr]

CrueKnight - My earlier case.

Which was:
-I defended myself
-I told someone that I am pressuring them

How does this make sense?

That was not my whole case. Please respond to the below:

He said my reason was bull, avoiding my demand to explain why he misquoted... or falsely claimed something.
I repeated, I wanted him to explain. After seeing his previous response, it sounded if he thought I was going to lynch him or something. At least that's how I looked at it since he said his vote on me remains.

Which post seemed he thought you were going to lynch him? What made you draw that conclusion from that post?

Also, what is wrong with him thinking you want him lynched?

But my ONE AND ONLY PURPOSE out of this whole thing was to get him to explain some stuff and not just call it a bullshit argument.

Then why did you say it was just a pressure vote?

Damn I hate being in the spotlight in the beginning all the time.

One person FoSes him, and he feels like he's "in the spotlight." I see no reason for a person to hate being in the spotlight anyway.

I still think he should explain why he misquoted.

Where did he misquote?

[Wickedestjr]

Also, I forgot to

Unvote Vote: VistaSoldier

. I still find him more suspicious than Furry or Katniss.

[Wickedestjr]

Ok. I'll bite and answer these questions,

hopefully to prove I am not mafia.

There is something wrong with this, but I can't figure out what it is.

I don't like this comment by wiked. It basically translates too, "I feel like this comment can later be used to help mislynch Katniss, so I want there to be something wrong with it, but I can't think of anything good right now so I'll be extremely vague about it and keep it as an option for later on".

If I wanted to use it later, why would I have said anything about it at all?
How do you know that a Katniss lynch would be a mislynch?
I was having trouble explaining why the comment from Katniss bothered me. Scott ended up saying something similar to what I was thinking. Speaking of which, why don't you have any problems with Scott's comment regarding it?
Also, do you actually think I would have gotten away with getting Katniss lynched for that comment?

Wiked, what I'm wondering is, why make this comment and not pursue what makes you feel there is something wrong with it?

I wasn't exactly sure how to explain my problem with it. Thanks for reminding about it though, because I had completely forgotten about it. Don't you see a problem with Katniss having a motivation to not look like mafia?

Similarly, I don't think your issues with squirrel were ever resolved either, and somehow he fell from being voted by you to "unsure, but have minor suspicions" and I don't recall anything squirell said that would justify the relative drop in squirrels (well, I guess that is me now) suspicion level. Care to clarify?

First of all, it was very early in the game, so I didn't see any better alternatives at the time. The person I had previously been voting wasn't
posting. Also, my vote for him was mainly for pressure and to get a better read on him. I did think his actions were suspicious, but I wasn't exactly sure he was scum. That is why I voted him. I have had previous experiences with players making terrible cases against me and flipping town. It has made me more careful. However, not only did I believe my case on CrueKnight was better, but regardless of my read on Mr. Squirrel, I would have switched my vote. That is because it served no purpose when he wasn't even there to respond or defend himself.

vote: wiked

Interesting. So Rhinox comes and makes a case against me for;

-Having problems with a quote, but being unable to explain why.
-Changing my read on Mr. Squirrel to having minor suspicions, when I had been previously voting him.


So, Rhinox comes and makes a post that is only directed at me, and involves voting me for just two minor/bad reasons. I'm going to move Rhinox/Mr. Squirrel to the "People That May be Good Lynch Choices" category. I have learned to be careful when players make bad cases against me, but both a player and their replacement doing it makes me rethink things.

Still like my vote for VistaSoldier much more.

[Wickedestjr]

If I wanted to use it later, why would I have said anything about it at all?

Its not really my place to speculate and WIFOM reasons why scum do what they do, but since you asked, possibly to show that you had a problem with the comment when it was made, and not having to go back to it later saying "I had a problem with this comment before but I didn't say anything until now".

Whatever. I really don't know how to defend myself here. All I can say is that it is wrong.

How do you know that a Katniss lynch would be a mislynch?

I don't. I figured it was obvious that I was considering the 'you as hypo scum' scenario. Or is this going to be one of those games where every post has to have a disclaimer to avoid being sidetracked by technicalities?

Okay.

I was having trouble explaining why the comment from Katniss bothered me. Scott ended up saying something similar to what I was thinking. Speaking of which, why don't you have any problems with Scott's comment regarding it?

Actually, scott provided reasons for why he didn't like the comment, and went on to vote Katniss, so no, I do not have a problem with scotts comments. This all happened in post 225. Your post didn't occur until after scotts post in post 242. Since you posted after scott, and you are now saying that what scott said is basically what you were feeling, why did you say in post 242 that you could not figure out why you didn't like katniss' post? There is a big glaring inconsistency here.

I read the post from Katniss before I saw Scott's comment.

IMO, this really looks like you were gently feeling out the prospect of a Katniss lynch by your comment in 242. When discussion moved on and nothing really came of it, you didn't feel any need to follow up.

If I was waiting to see what others thought before casting my vote, then why wouldn't I have voted Katniss also? Also, if I was afraid to start accusations, then why would I have been the first the make the points I made against CrueKnight, and why would I have been the first one to vote for VistaSoldier?

Also, do you actually think I would have gotten away with getting Katniss lynched for that comment?

Not for that comment alone, no. But scott presented a case that had other points besides that comment, and had a bandwagon formed, it seems like you were in good position to use that comment for jumping on the wagon.

Scott was the only one that voted Katniss I believe. There was no bandwagon. And anyway, there is more than one point on Katniss anyway. So there would still be good reasons for lynch Katniss. Also, I think it is scummy that he is worried about appearing like mafia to us. So that point I couldn't explain is a good one anyway.

I wasn't exactly sure how to explain my problem with it. Thanks for reminding about it though, because I had completely forgotten about it. Don't you see a problem with Katniss having a motivation to not look like mafia?

Your exact words were that you "couldn't figure out what was wrong" with katniss' comment, not that you couldn't explain it. I point that out because I see you changed the wording and I believe there is a clear distinction between the two... 1 is saying you think there is something wrong, you just don't know what, and the other is saying you know there is something wrong, you just can't put it into words. Regardless, see above for why it doesn't make sense, whether you didn't know or couldn't explain, based on the fact that scott posted his comments before you and you say scott basically said what you were feeling.

When I first responded to the comment I had meant to say I couldn't really explain what I had problems with. I wasn't too careful with the wording because both meant that I disliked the comment, but couldn't say why.

Regarding Katniss' comment itself, I like how you word "Don't you see a problem..." like there is a problem there I would be foolish not to see. There is no problem. Mafia have a motivation to not look like mafia. Town have a motivation to not look like mafia. It is not helpful to anyones win condition (except for a jester) to look like mafia.

Townies have one goal in this game. Catch scum. That doesn't mean to act as pro-town as you can. It means to catch scum. Sure you should defend yourself and explain your actions, but you shouldn't devote your time trying to look pro-town, while you could be doing more productive things. Like scumhunting.

That being said, its not very tactful to announce that you're only doing something to try to prove your not mafia. But then again, what motivation does a mafia player have to announce that they're only doing something to not look like mafia? So its a null tell.

Townies would have no reason to say that. Townies don't have the motivation to appear pro-town. Scum do. Nobody would have any motivation for saying that, however, scum are the only ones that would have motivation to appear pro-town, so they would be more likely to make that comment.

I'm much more interested in those that think the comment is scummy.

Then why have you completely ignored Scott?

There we go with that "expain" word thrown in there again... Its moot though because you already said scotts post was pretty much what you were feeling, so in reality you did both know and could explain what you felt was wrong with katniss' post.

Also, why does me voting you make me more lynchable, other than the typical OMGUS reaction? A crappy case is a crappy case, but I haven't yet seen any good reasons to show me I'm off the mark here just yet.

And if you think about it, it makes perfect sense for my first course of action in the game to be following up on squirrel's suspicions... I have the added knowledge of knowing squirrel's allignment and that his comments were genuine.

The case on me was bad. That, combined with Squirrel's bad case made me move you up into a higher category.

[Wickedestjr]

@wicked - What case of SJs? As far as I can tell its all misunderstanding/misrep over views on pressure votes.

Post 267 is the case I agreed with.

Note that these points I have also covered.

Then either defend yourself again, or show me where you defended against those attacks.

The argument isn't on SolemnJ anymore. It isn't about me accusing him. It's about the results. I don't want to go back and point out the details but by this time, I have forgotten what SolemnJ said that got me suspicious.

What do you mean the argument isn't this or the argument isn't that? I'm not going to forget about something because other people have, unless I see a good reason to. Also, what do you mean you don't know what SolemnJ did to make you suspicious?

As for me being in the spotlight, there were 2 if not 3 guys Fingering at me while we were in the Joker Mode.

Who? What posts?

I expected my old Furry attack to fail.
Also, Rhinox, I disagree with what you said about my new attack on furry; if he turns out to be town, I'll get myself an avatar.

So your old attack of Furry was different from your current case?
Why do you care if your old case would fail? Why not post it anyway?

Well this is impossible to prove and a lame excuse.

Rhinox's point about me regarding my response to Katniss's comment was also unprovable. Also, don't people normally read posts in order? How should I have defended myself if what I am saying is actually the truth?

The Katniss comment is still a null tell. Townies have a collective goal of catching scum, and one way to help the town do that is to not sidetrack the town into thinking your scum when you have the inside knowledge of knowing you're not. If Katniss showed a consistent record of only defending and trying not to look scummy, that would be one thing, but one comment saying he wants to "hopefully prove he's not scum" is not "devoting his time trying to look pro-town". Katniss has appeared to be scumhunting in this game, as far as I can tell.

We could continue arguing over this forever, but I don't feel like it. It is pretty obvious to me that the argument about this point is mostly because we have different opinions. So, I don't see why this accusation is valid.

Arguing that the case on you is bad is not much of an argument, but I'll play along. Suppose you're right and the case on you is the worst possible case... is town or scum more likely to make a bad case?

Scum.

Would you rather players sit back and not present cases at all until there is a good case?

Yes. There is no point spending the whole game making bad cases. Especially this late in the game.

Can there ever be a good case that way?

Yes. I believe I have made good cases this game. Such as my cases against VistaSoldier and CrueKnight.

I guess it was more convenient to attack Haylen.

lol... yeah im happy with my vote

Why does that comment make you more happy with your vote?


SolemnJ - Why do you give up on your Furry case?


Does anybody want to comment on my vote for VistaSoldier?

[Wickedestjr]

Sorry for not posting yesterday. I was having issues with the internet. I'll try to catch-up as soon as possible.

[Wickedestjr]

Unvote Vote: CrueKnight

He looks to be the biggest bandwagon that I actually prefer, and we only have three days. I'm going to start catching up now.


Hi Faraday.

And that not an inconsistancy, which I addressed already too

Making a pressure vote doesn't mean you want the player lynched. I have casted votes before just to pressure the player. You are trying to act like you can never just do one or the other. I think you are only saying that, because of post 267.


Hi foilist13.

Feels different to when I played with him before, he was town, I was scum in that game, but yeh he seems to have improved.

Thanks.

Wicked has twice now pointed out that he's never been scum. Noted.

No comment.

Post 273. Wicked you're willing to vote yourself? WTF??

That was a joke.

I consider myself and easy lynch because my playstyle has flaws that I am still working on.

Such as?

He seems to be overloading the thread with wall posts that no one wants to read, but which have exceedingly little content. That to me is a form of lurking. He is posting lots, but saying almost nothing, so that people pay little attention to him. Its pretty WIFOMy, but its the best I've got.

I disagree. I think I have posted content, given my thoughts, and given my suspects.

Maybe I am just seeing things, as I am not very aware of different playstyles and how people address situations differently here but I have this phrase I use called "deep thinking" which I always view as a town tell: It is the line of reasoning and logic that seems too genuine and thought over to be scum. Now, of course, scum can fake this if they are good enough, but the absence of such thoughts over many, many posts is worrisome. Much of Wicked's supposed content has been very thin or simply a redirecting question back at someone else. This is very scummy, and easily worth my vote.

See my response to foilist.


Also, I would like to say that this is the way I normally play in terms of content and sizes of posts.


I am going to keep my vote on CrueKnight, but I would prefer to lynch foilist, Furry, or Katniss.

[Wickedestjr]

Well, yes, I hope you would disagree with the facts. If you didn't disagree then you would not be playing to win. You'd be saying "I am scum, please lynch me." You are not really providing content, you are providing posts that respond to the accusations, but don't answer them. Note my paragraph that I talked about you, all you had to say to that entire paragraph was 'See response above" and all that said was "I disagree." So you responded to two different people in a way that could be summed up with "I disagree." Now sure, you said a little bit more than that, but it was all fluff beyond that.

What is your definition of content then? Also, not everything in my posts has been responding to accusations.

Also I have to question "Also, I would like to say that this is the way I normally play in terms of content and size of posts." It seems to be baiting me to go and check it out, which makes me believe, by phrasing, that you are trying to parrot your past town play as your first time as scum, if you sig of 7 games played is still accurate.

What do you mean "trying to parrot your past town play as your first time as scum" ? Also, what is wrong with saying this is the way I normally play if it is the truth?

That post seemed very scummy to me, it addressed none of my concerned, and posted no meaningful content.

How am I supposed to defend against an accusation that is solely because I am apparently not posting content?

Also his vote on Crue seems poorly timed and out of place.

Why?

I just can't see anything Wicked has posted as pro town and a lot of anti-town/scummy playstyle that doesn't add up to me.

How am I supposed to defend against this?


This attack on me is terrible. It has nothing I can defend against. Also, I love how he is attacking

me

for no content. What about players like Haylen or Torqez? Also, why is limited content scummy? It doesn't say in anybody's win condition that they have to post content. Does it? Posting content is not an essential to catching scum, so why does it matter if I'm not posting content? I have given my stance on things. Why is that not enough?

Why are you voting for someone who isn't even in your top three?

He's number 4 and I'm guessing there's at least 4 scum. Also, I doubt I would be able to convince everybody to change this close to deadline and none of my top three suspects seem to be big bandwagon candidates.

Crueknight has only spammed
and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.
His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

-Spamming (which almost everyone was doing)
-Defending himself "dumbly" (what exactly is 'dumbly' and why is it a tell?)
-Random/selfvote (why is this a tell?)

SJ is already saying that he could easily be newb town though, still keeping the groundwork for a jump if its needed.

This is misrepresenting SolemnJ. You are starting to look scummier. Also, the SolemnJ case isn't good.

Lurking is a problem for me, and Haylen did it in the last game we played together too, so this is the wagon I'm getting on.

What was her allignment that game?

[Wickedestjr]

Why do you pick wagons?

If I continue to vote for foilist, what good will that do?

[Wickedestjr]

Hey guys. I'm a few pages back, but I will start catching up now. May be a bit slow, cuz I'm also watching a movie.

[Wickedestjr]

Crueknight has only spammed
and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.
His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

-Spamming (which almost everyone was doing)
-Defending himself "dumbly" (what exactly is 'dumbly' and why is it a tell?)
-Random/selfvote (why is this a tell?)

SJ is already saying that he could easily be newb town though, still keeping the groundwork for a jump if its needed.

This is misrepresenting SolemnJ. You are starting to look scummier. Also, the SolemnJ case isn't good.

Let me ask you, why? Why is this misrepresenting SolemnJ? What do you think of SolemnJ? And why are you defending him so?

His points were very valid tbh.

I will explain once SolemnJ responds to Furry's post.

Why do you pick wagons?

If I continue to vote for foilist, what good will that do?

1: If you have valid points against him, reveal it and we may all agree upon it.
2: Now you are acting pretty scummy.

1: I gave reasons. I don't recall you saying anything about them. Why don't you pay attention?

2: Really? So, I join my favorite bandwagon, because the deadline is close, and I don't want the day to end in a no-lynch, and that is scummy? I think you are just angry that I critisized the case against your defender. Am I right? OMGUS?

[Wickedestjr]

It is of course possible this is just how wicked plays, and if so, that can't be helped.

What kind of townie doesn't even check my meta? There is no reason not to. You just keep making up stupid excuses not to.

But SK in a game of 15 presents seem odd balancing issues I have found in the past. Talking about my own balancing, I'd never have a game of 15 with an SK, when 16 fits it so much better.

CK I would put a decent wager on being town (I would target him as a hider for example). The case on him mostly seems to be on weak reasoning, when I went through I had a hard time figuring anything out on it. Out of the four people voting him I have a slight town read on one (SB), the rest I wouldnt shed a tear if they got vigged. It just has quite a few of the markings of a wagon on town that is being pushed enough to be an alternative if a big wagon falls apart.

Haylen I dont see my vote going to outside of a deadline lynch, mostly due to a case *mostly* based on lurking. Im not a big lynch lurkers fan untill there is evidence (role or connection) that they are scum. When there are people who are legitimately scummy, they are a really poor lynch choice. If they are town, it has good chances of resulting in another mislynch.

You don't seem to be trying to divert the bandwagon to somebody you do suspect.

Please explain why the points against CrueKnight are bad. Don't just say they are bad. That doesn't do anything.

Also, you are underestimating the case against Haylen. It is not just lurking.


Also, please explain your town reads.

Crueknight has only spammed

and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.

His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

-Spamming (which almost everyone was doing)

-Defending himself "dumbly" (what exactly is 'dumbly' and why is it a tell?)

-Random/selfvote (why is this a tell?)

SJ is already saying that he could easily be newb town though, still keeping the groundwork for a jump if its needed.

This is misrepresenting SolemnJ. You are starting to look scummier. Also, the SolemnJ case isn't good.

???

So which of my colorful lines is wrong then?

Back to SJ case in a little

The orange and purple lines were misrepresentations.


foilist seems to be copying VistaSoldier's scummy behavior.

1: When is it acceptable to try and pressure vote someone that you have a town read on?
2: When is it acceptable to ever have a vote on a player you have a town read on?

1: There is nothing wrong with it, but I don't think it is unneccessary.

2: For pressure. There is nothing wrong with voting somebody to pressure them to confirm your town read on them. I have done it before.

Pressure voting a player is always fine, but you should always be willing to have that player lynched. A vote to lynch is a little more serious about that then pressure, but you should never say "damn I didnt want them lynched, I though they were town" if somehow a 10x multipost occurs lynching a player.

I mean frick, how hard is it for people to grasp this concept. Dont vote town, vote scum, pressure slight scum. Tah-dah!

Alright then. Consider the following possibility. DeathNote is still in the game and is hardly posting in the thread. For this reason, I have a neutral read on him. I vote him to pressure him and make him come and defend himself. When he does this, I look at his reaction to the vote to try and determine his allignment. Even though I voted him, and even though I didn't have a town read on him, and even though I didn't want him lynched, it was still a pressure vote. This is an example of how pressure votes aren't always towards players you want lynched. So, you did in fact contradict yourself.

[Wickedestjr]

@wicked - If Haylen flips town, you might have to take her place in the fuzzy handcuffs... or maybe cruel... Ill have time to ponder im sure

Why me? Why cruelty? Why not SolemnJ?

[Wickedestjr]

Vote: Furry

Respond to my last few posts please.

[Wickedestjr]

CK I would put a decent wager on being town (I would target him as a hider for example). The case on him mostly seems to be on weak reasoning, when I went through I had a hard time figuring anything out on it. Out of the four people voting him I have a slight town read on one (SB), the rest I wouldnt shed a tear if they got vigged. It just has quite a few of the markings of a wagon on town that is being pushed enough to be an alternative if a big wagon falls apart.

Haylen I dont see my vote going to outside of a deadline lynch, mostly due to a case *mostly* based on lurking. Im not a big lynch lurkers fan untill there is evidence (role or connection) that they are scum. When there are people who are legitimately scummy, they are a really poor lynch choice. If they are town, it has good chances of resulting in another mislynch.

You don't seem to be trying to divert the bandwagon to somebody you do suspect.

Please explain why the points against CrueKnight are bad. Don't just say they are bad. That doesn't do anything.

Also, you are underestimating the case against Haylen. It is not just lurking.

I was trying to get something on SJ started near the end of the day

Give me a clean outline of a CK wagon and I will explain why each point
is bad, that way im not missing things.

It was enough of lurking based things for me to not like it at all.

Okay

See my post #7, my post #25, and my post #26 in isolation. Also, please explain how forgetting his reasons for voting somebody wasn't scummy.

Then you are in fact underestimating the case. There were pretty good points on page 10.

Crueknight has only spammed

and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.

His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

-Spamming (which almost everyone was doing)

-Defending himself "dumbly" (what exactly is 'dumbly' and why is it a tell?)

-Random/selfvote (why is this a tell?)

SJ is already saying that he could easily be newb town though, still keeping the groundwork for a jump if its needed.

This is misrepresenting SolemnJ. You are starting to look scummier. Also, the SolemnJ case isn't good.

???

So which of my colorful lines is wrong then?

Back to SJ case in a little

The orange and purple lines were misrepresentations.

1: Purple I can see you argue, 2: but orange I dont see as a misrep in the least bit.

1: So it

was

misrepresenting?

2: I'll explain this one when SolemnJ returns.

[1: Ummm... if you are coming up with a scenario like that doesnt mean I have contridicted myself. First off, I wouldnt ever of voted DN for that scenario, using others to get reads on him is better. ] [2: Second, when I am voting someone for pressure, I am always at least somewhat ok with their lynch. I could be pressuing a secondary suspect, or a slight read, but whoever I am voting I would always be ok lynching.]

[3: This really does not have anything to do with alignments in this game though, just difference of opinions.]

1: What's wrong with coming up with another scenario? You said voting for somebody means you want them lynched. You also said pressure votes can be very helpful (or something like that). It doesn't matter that I brought up another scenario. It just shows that there are scenarios where pressure votes don't mean votes for a lynch. Also, who cares if you wouldn't have voted for him? It is just a scenario I came up with. You are doing a poor job of defending yourself.

2: I understand. You have reiterated this point over and over. That is the reason why I brought up that scenario.

3: Sort of. You contradicted yourself, and now you are trying to pretend to have this strange opinion on the subject in order to defend yourself. I can not see how you wouldn't understand this.

@wicked - If Haylen flips town, you might have to take her place in the fuzzy handcuffs... or maybe cruel... Ill have time to ponder im sure

Why me? Why cruelty? Why not SolemnJ?

You staying on the CK wagon while seeming content with the Haylen wagon going to a mislynch. It seems like you were avoiding the mislynch while staying on a different wagon I consider a mislynch. Cruel... just bothers me a bit on a gut level, nothing too much on that. I would rather play house with people who I dont think are top picks though.

So your reasons for suspecting me are basically because I supported the Haylen lynch and also suspected a person you believe to be town? Also, what about SolemnJ?

[Wickedestjr]

I should be able to post something substantial later today once I get back to PA. One thing that makes me curious is why is furry so strongly defending ck as if he knows he's town... this was going on yesterday as well. I can understand saying that there isn't enough evidence to support ck being scum, but I certainly wouldn't call him town enough to avidly defend against his lynch. This sorta reeks of hypo-scum furry wanting to get town cred for trying to prevent a townie mislynch.

vote: furry

Goodposting.

[Wickedestjr]

Sorry guys. I don't have much time to post today. I spent my only time catching up in my other game. This should be my first priority tomorrow though.

[Wickedestjr]

You voted for CK.. fine. After that you never even mentioned the Haylen wagon. I find this highly contradictory to your playstyle throughout the game - you've been quoting and replying to basically everything, so how come you had nothing to say about a wagon building on someone who wasn't in your

top 4 suspects

?

I didn't make any posts between the time that she claimed and the time she got lynched. I didn't have time to. I recall making a post one night, and then logging on the next night to find that Haylen had been lynched. Before then, there were two bandwagons formed. The bandwagon on CK and the one on Haylen. I joined the bandwagon on CK, however, I had expressed earlier suspicion of Haylen, so I thought that I had made my feelings clear. Even though I would have been okay with the Haylen lynch, I still preferred the CK lynch.

Not only that, but you're content with voting for your 4th placed suspect purely because it's a bandwagon. I really, really don't like this.

I gave reasons for my suspicions of my top 3. They were completely ignored. Is that my fault? Also, we were close to deadline, and I didn't want to waste time trying to persuade players to jump on one of my top three bandwagons, because, I doubted my capability of being able to do so in such short time, and if I wasted time doing that, we would have even less time to switch to another bandwagon if somebody claimed a PR.

This sort of apathy towards who gets lynched reeks of scum for me. I think I would be a lot less suspicious of you had you at least attacked the Haylen wagon - obviously you must have thought it a mislynch if she wasn't in your top 4 suspects - or actively pushed an alternate case, but you did neither. Explain.

I don't know that I was correct on all of my main suspects. I think I am right on at least 1 or 2 of them, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few people I thought were town ended up flipping scum. In fact there are a few players I am going to be watching closely today that weren't in my top 3. Also, think about it. Would you rather I be the only person voting Furry a few days before deadline with only a few other players showing interest? How would that help?


Also, cruelty, what do you mean by:

Attacking the Haylen wagon.
and
Actively pushing an alternative case.

...?

Also I like how I get a roll of the eyes about SK even though I am probably correct, good job wicked!

I didn't post the eye-roll because of that. I posted it because I thought it was useless speculation.

Purple can be interpreted different ways (voting pattern/general uselessness) so if you see it different there can be debate.

I'll explain this one also, when SolemnJ comments.

Yes, you supported the mislynch while not being on the wagon. At the same time you were sitting on a wagon of another person who I think is a mislynch. Because of the second wagon you were not a part of the mislynch wagon.

I can't defend against this. Having different suspects doesn't mean I'm scum. You suspect SolemnJ who I think is town. So that means I should be suspecting you too for that? Also, apart from SolemnJ, I don't even think you have mentioned your other suspects.

Also, Furry, please respond to the rest of my earlier post.


Torqez's vote is terrible. I don't know what it means though.


foilist, are you ignoring me?


Also, Sir Chris deserves and

FoS: Sir Chris

. I only know one of his suspects and it is for bad reasons. BTW Sir Chris, if I am your biggest suspect, why not vote me?

[Wickedestjr]

foilist, are you ignoring me?

I'm sorry, I don't remember you asking me something. Yes?

I didn't ask you anything, but you seemed to ignore these:

He seems to be overloading the thread with wall posts that no one wants to read, but which have exceedingly little content. That to me is a form of lurking. He is posting lots, but saying almost nothing, so that people pay little attention to him. Its pretty WIFOMy, but its the best I've got.

I disagree. I think I have posted content, given my thoughts, and given my suspects.

Lurking is a problem for me, and Haylen did it in the last game we played together too, so this is the wagon I'm getting on.

What was her allignment that game?

Also, you didn't seem to have a problem with this;

foilist seems to be copying VistaSoldier's scummy behavior

So basically you were apathetic. Ok.

How was I apathetic?

I really don't care too much where your vote is as long as you have decent justification for it.

Didn't I give reasons for my vote for CrueKnight? What was wrong with those reasons?

And are you serious? I am saying, if you didn't like the Haylen lynch (which you obviously didn't, given that you were supporting another wagon)...

When did I say I didn't like the Haylen lynch? There was a moment when

I

was voting Haylen. I just thought that CrueKnight was more likely to be scum.

...then you should have actively pushed for a lynch that you did support, or at least seriously voiced concerns.

I'm tired of repeating this over and over again. We were really close to deadline. I had a feeling that if I attempted to divert the bandwagon to my preference, that I would only be wasting time, which is very detrimental a few days before deadline.

Oh and I don't vote you because the day is lasting for weeks and I have all the time in the world to vote for you. I don't see it as a pressing concern either way.

First of all, we have like 15/16 days. That is not "all the time in the world". Also, even if we did have "all the time in the world", that doesn't mean you waste a day just for the heck of it.

However I am going to vote for you because your demeanor has shifted drastically today from yesterday,

How?

and by golly, you did ask me to.

Where? Quote it.

You seem to be a bit edgy and a bit back and forth in your tone and I find it not so subtle that I, one of the people who didn't like you yesterday is now gifted with the merit of a suspicious nod my way.

How am I supposed to defend against this?


Sir Chris, I don't think malpascp was trying to insult you. OMGUS is a common mafia term that isn't meant to be insulting. OMGUS would be if a player A attacked player B, and player B attacked player A just for attacking him.


Also, Furry, can you respond to this:

1: What's wrong with coming up with another scenario? You said voting for somebody means you want them lynched. You also said pressure votes can be very helpful (or something like that). It doesn't matter that I brought up another scenario. It just shows that there are scenarios where pressure votes don't mean votes for a lynch. Also, who cares if you wouldn't have voted for him? It is just a scenario I came up with. You are doing a poor job of defending yourself.

[Wickedestjr]

cruelty, could your suspicion of malpascp be summarized as not contributing much?

Rhinox, what do you think of cruelty?

[Wickedestjr]

Welcome cades.


Furry, I think I see what you are saying. One more question: Let's say that I vote for somebody that hasn't done anything scummy nor townie, and I do it mainly to pressure vote them. Does that mean I want them lynched?


Sir Chris, I'm not saying your vote is OMGUS. Please read the thread carefully. I was simply explaining something to you that you didn't seem to understand. That's all.


@foilist -

deleted by mod

[Wickedestjr]

SolemnJ, how much experience with mafia do you have?

[Wickedestjr]

Oh and Sir Chris, since your online, what do you think of cruelty?

[Wickedestjr]

cruelty, could your suspicion of malpascp be summarized as not contributing much?

vote: mal

Basically anonymous yesterday, a few vote changes and most notably hopped onto the Haylen wagon very late and without any real explanation. You got some questions to answer.

Could your questions be summarised as inane and redundant?

I just want some clarification. I wasn't sure if you would correct me for calling it just that. So, can I say that your case is just that he isn't contributing?

You were on a wagon you knew wouldn't result in a lynch, you were off a wagon that hyposcumWicked knew would result in a mislynch.

You are jumping to conclusions here.

Being on the CK wagon effectively buddies you a little with the others who were on there, thereby increasing your town cred and puts you in a position to criticise the people who voted for Haylen.

There are many things wrong with this.

1: If I was interested with buddying with the players on a wagon, then I would have been better off voting Haylen.

2: Jumping on a bandwagon hardly increases town credit. If anything, it attracts suspicion. Like now.

3: I never criticised the people who voted for Haylen. This is a misrep.

Your case on CK in this scenario is really irrelevant, just useless squawking to disguise your actual motivation.

This is misrepping me. I explained why I jumped on the bandwagon. We were just a few days away from the deadline, and the CrueKnight bandwagon was the one I preferred. What I find funny is that had I jumped on the Haylen bandwagon, you most likely would have had no problems with it, as I believe there were several other players that did, and you didn't attack any of them.

I mean, I can't see any motivation for town to be on a wagon that was obviously going to lose, purely because it was a wagon. Towns concern is, as someone (probably you, that'd be ironic) pointed out, catching scum.

I didn't jump on the CrueKnight bandwagon purely because it was a bandwagon. That is another misrepresentation and you know it. Would you have liked it if I parked my vote on Furry when we were a few days from deadline with nobody else showing any interest in joining the bandwagon? What more could I have done to persuade people to switch their votes? There is only one more person today that agrees with me that Furry is scum.

Looking innocent is nice and all, but is by far secondary to the overall goal of lynching scum. Therefore I seriously question your presence on CK's wagon.

What made you draw the conclusion that I'm trying to appear innocent?

you never once tried to push CK as a better lynch. Despite posting twice more before deadline. Doesn't add up.

First of all, I admit I didn't push much for the CK lynch but that was for three reasons:

1. I doubted my ability to do so.

2. I was still fine with the Haylen lynch.

3. I knew I wouldn't get enough people to help lynch anybody else, so CK and Haylen were really my only two options. I voted CK, and I decided I'd just let all the other town members vote their preference and let the lynch be the one that the town most preferred.


Second of all, how were you pushing for the Haylen lynch? Your only post within three days of the deadline was this:

Don't buy the claim. I also note the complete lack of content despite it being asked for and promised numerous times. Coupled with the woe is me whining, I like this lynch.

Mal, elaborate please.

Furry often the point of a pressure vote is to get a read - I personally never had a town read on Haylen, and her reaction hasn't impressed me at all.

Her reaction "didn't impress you at all." That doesn't actually seem like a strong stance to me, and this whole post looks like one designed to fly under the radar.

Vote: cruelty

This attack consists of lots of misrepresentations. Also there are a few other points I had against him, but I'll post those later.

[Wickedestjr]

Sir Chris, I have been suspicious of cruelty since I observed his behavior a few days ago.

[Wickedestjr]

What do you think of mal's vote of me citing OMGUS then?

I agree with some of the points in mal's case, but I disagree with the point about the OMGUS. I only think OMGUS is a good point to use if there is evidence to back it up, which if mal has some evidence, that would be nice to show. However, I think both you and malpascp are town. Did you defend yourself against the case anyway?

[Wickedestjr]

I just want some clarification. I wasn't sure if you would correct me for calling it just that. So, can I say that your case is just that he isn't contributing?

You can call it a pressure vote that failed. There is no case, just an observation that he's not contributing.

Why would you vote him for not contributing after we lynched a townie for that same reason?

I knew I wouldn't get enough people to help lynch anybody else, so CK and Haylen were really my only two options. I voted CK, and I decided I'd just let all the other town members vote their preference and let the lynch be the one that the town most preferred.

1: So you decided against scumhunting until the end and instead just pitched your tent and hoped for the best? 2: This is pro-town how?

1: Yes.

2: I'm not saying it is or isn't. I'm saying its not anti-town.

[1: I started the Haylen wagon, and my final post before the deadline was confirmation that I was happy with it. That post was 14 hours before the day was closed. Not really sure how this is a valid point, you're attacking me for being happy with my vote on a wagon that I started and continually advocated? I mean, I was wrong about her alignment but [2: this is a ludicrous attempt to incriminate me.]

1: Alright, I admit that wasn't a good example.

2: I admit it was an inaccurate point, however, the same could be said about your case against me.

You voted for your

fourth

suspect. You specifically stated you thought

three players to be more suspicious

and yet you just sat down on the CK wagon and went dark.

I have already explained this. You don't have to reiterate the point over and over again. I understand why you are attacking me.

1: If I was interested with buddying with the players on a wagon, then I would have been better off voting Haylen.

2: Jumping on a bandwagon hardly increases town credit. If anything, it attracts suspicion. Like now.

3: I never criticised the people who voted for Haylen. This is a misrep.

1: Nope, I'd already questioned why you were voting for your fourth suspect, you couldn't shift to someone who was at best fifth on your list.

2: You jumped on a bandwagon that went nowhere. I suspect you knew it wouldn't amount to anything and used the opportunity to attempt to get onside with the players on it.

3: I never said you did. I said you put yourself in a position to. You're actually misrepping my argument. Amusing.

1: Yeah I could've. I was already voting Haylen at one point in the game. It wasn't because she was my main suspect though. It was a pressure vote.

2: I'm not phsycic. If I had to bet I would've guessed that Haylen would have been the lynch, but there is no way I could no for sure.

Also, why the heck would I want to get town credit from Scott Brosius and Torqez? You obviously didn't think this case through. If I am scum, then I just killed one of the two, leaving Torqez who has been the most quiet person in the game. Also, like I said, bandwagoning doesn't give you town credit.

3: I apologize, I miss interprated it. Either way, it is a stupid point.

Why would I want to critisize the people who were bandwagoning on somebody that I had previously been voting? This case sucks.

All of this followed up by what amounts to an OMGUS vote.

Can we lynch cruelty now?


Also, I highly suggest that everybody reads this post of mine. If you don't want to read the whole thing, that is fine. I have bolded and enlarged the portions that I really want to be seen.

[Wickedestjr]

Ooh. I just noticed this:

For the record

I don't necessarily want a Haylen lynch,

I want less Haylen spam and more Haylen content.

cruelty?

[Wickedestjr]

EBWOP: That quote was said by cruelty himself. The one that said this:

I started the Haylen wagon, and my final post before the deadline was confirmation that I was happy with it.

In the quote in my previous post, he said he didn't necessarily want Haylen lynched, yet here he seems to be taking credit for starting it, even though when he first voted her he didn't want her lynched.

[Wickedestjr]

Furry, I think I see what you are saying. One more question: Let's say that I vote for somebody that hasn't done anything scummy nor townie, and I do it mainly to pressure vote them. Does that mean I want them lynched?

I dunno, I wouldnt be pressure voting a neutral/no read.

Let's look at the contradiction one more time. Hopefully this time you'll understand why I was voting you:

I think voting for someone means you want them lynched.

Then again im not really into the 'hip and trendy' lifestyles that are going on now adays. Does 'dont necessarily want' mean 'would like to have' in today groovy slang?

and then you said:

Need to get caught up, but this is a fail of a HoS. Pressure votes work wonders. People play differently under pressure

Keep in mind that your second quote was in response to me giving CrueKnight an HoS. Remember why I gave CrueKnight the HoS? One of the reasons was because CrueKnight had said:

I'm just voting for pressure. I do not have any intentions to lynch you.

You seemed to have a problem with me attacking this. However, you also disagree with it. So...thanks for claiming scum.

[Wickedestjr]

1: You think I am town but FoS'd me earlier? Weird thing to say. 2: Also he didn't have a case really, he just made a lot of vague "leave it up to the imagination" stuff and the only thing he said that was not vague was the thing that I only voted you because you attacked me, which literally can't be true.

1: Actually it was something you said after I FoSed you along with this post that have given me a town read.

2: The points I agreed with were that I didn't think your posts were good.

[Wickedestjr]

was Vigilante a townie?

What?

Why do you ask? I don't see anything I'd consider scummy at the moment, and I think he's been making some good points.

What did you think of posts 548-550? Also, I asked, because I was beginning to suspect him.

1: Does this, or does this not look like I was becoming more and more convinced of her guilt? Taking my quotes (specifically, the first one) out of context in an attempt to make them look bad is horribly, horribly scummy. 2: Funny, though.

1: It doesn't look like you were becoming more suspicious. All of those quotes say that you weren't sure, but were voting her so you could find out.

2: Why do you keep making comments like this? These attempts to just laugh away my case are very scummy.

Read him in iso. Tell me he isn't active lurking.

He is. That doesn't mean he's scum. Also, active lurking is the same thing as not contributing. ... So I don't see how this defends against my point.

BTW, Faraday and Rhinox also need to explain themselves.

1: So scum is ALWAYS anti-town? 2: Or would you concede that occasionally their survival becomes more important than bringing down town?

1: Where the heck did I say that? Stop twisting my words scum.

2: This has absolutely nothing to do with my survival. I wasn't even on the chopping block Day 1. Quit imagining.

Are you?

Yes, I understand why you are voting me if that is what you are asking.

1: Well, I presume there's more than one scum so it's conceivable that your partner(s) wanted him killed and you went along with it. This is a WIFOM deflection at best.

2: I didn't say bandwagoning gives you town credit. You were on a wagon that wasn't a mislynch. You specifically stated you wanted to be on a wagon despite not really liking CK as a lynch that much. There's absolutely no reason for town to do that.

1: First of all, nobody voted CK after I did. So I don't know what you meant by having my scumbuddies going along with it. Also, how could I have possibly planned this out? Odds are if I am scum, then some of my scumbuddies would have been on the Haylen lynch, so all these points look like grasping at straws now that I've completely destroyed your case.

2: So you are saying it would give me town credit for not being on the mislynch? If so, then this is also a bad point, because if anything, it would be better for me to go with what the majority went if I was really worrying about this.


Ooh. Somebody just claimed scum.

[Wickedestjr]

Right so this is contradictory - you specifically stated that you had two players who you thought would be better lynches (CK and Haylen, as per the above quote). Why didn't you even mention them?

Nope, Haylen and CK were below Furry, VistaSoldier, and Katniss on my scumlist.

Also, Haylen posted no content at all between your vote for her and this post, her only post was about her real life dramas and a little bit of moaning that the two of us were attacking her. You didn't get an answer to your questions, so I'm not sure why you unvoted. Moving on.

1. My initial vote was partly for pressure.

2. I was pretty sure that Haylen was getting enough attention, and wanted to switch back to my main suspect VistaSoldier.

Scum would love to be in a position whereby they can attack townies who were on a wagon that resulted in a mislynch.

This is another bad point.

[Wickedestjr]

What did you think of posts 548-550? Also, I asked, because I was beginning to suspect him.

I think there is some interesting stuff there, but its meh as far as a case goes.

Can you elaborate on this please? I don't understand why you feel this way.

Why would you vote him for not contributing after we lynched a townie for that same reason?

1: This is non-sequitor.

2: The stuff about cruelty saying he doesn't necessarily want a haylen lynch but voting to lynch her anyways is the most interesting part, but its weak. 3: I think cruelty has done a god job of explaining it already. I interpretted his vote first as a pressure vote, which later turned into a desire to lynch after haylen failed to deliver.

1: How?

2: That wasn't my point anyway.

3: Okay, so cruelty may have been the first one to vote Haylen, but that doesn't deserve any credit. Look at this:

Post 227, cruelty says this:

Haylen, you still haven't contributed. A half-assed answer and some bullshit about spoiler tags is not contribution. My vote stands.

So obviously none of his reasons have changed since he said these weren't reasons worth lynching. His next post also shows that he feels this way:

I'm in 4 games currently, one of which is in lylo and I'm at least making an effort to stay connected here.

I find it hard to believe that you can't find the time to put together a few quick thoughts for this game whilst you're waiting for people to reply in the other thread. I mean really, how hard is it to at least read the thread and put together some quick thoughts?

You've managed to post about 30 times in this game, how come you've offered no opinions on anything game related?

This was his last post before more reasons were brought up against Haylen here:

I am now alive in 3. I am dead in 1. And the reason i wasnt posting was because i had a very unstable mylo and lylo in a game that i've finished just now, and I won it

Heya, sorry i've been pretty ill recently. Managed to catch a bug going round a place I was in for less than 2 days. It has not been cool.

Anywho, I will re-read and post ASAP.

Haylen, you still haven't contributed. A half-assed answer and some bullshit about spoiler tags is not contribution. My vote stands.

Ok. Let's put it this way. I'll give you a riddle. You're in a game on page ten that is nowhere near deadline. You're in another game, you're at L-1 as is another guy, everybody is voting and you have less that 24 hours to convince somebody to change their vote from yourself to the other guy. Where do you concentrate your efforts for those 24 hours?

Haylen's excuse(s) are very inconsistent.

First she says he is in Lylo, changes her mind and says she was sick, and then goes back to her lylo excuse again.

During that sick-excuse post, Haylen shows that she has time to re-read, but not to spend enough time trying to contribute to the thread.

Other than this, all of her posts have been 90% spam, and the other 10% just redundancy.

An inconsistent excuse to me is a sign of a liar,
especially where she notes that she can and has re-read, but is unable to post real thoughts.

unvote; vote Haylen

This was the main reason we lynched Haylen. Because of her excuses. This wasn't a reason that cruelty brought up. He was trying to pretend he had caused Haylen to get lynched to show he had taken a strong stance, but he didn't.

BTW, Faraday and Rhinox also need to explain themselves.

What exactly is it that I need to explain?

Why you voted malpascp for doing something that a townie did that we lynched.

1: So scum is ALWAYS anti-town? 2: Or would you concede that occasionally their survival becomes more important than bringing down town?

1: Where the heck did I say that? Stop twisting my words scum.

2: This has absolutely nothing to do with my survival. I wasn't even on the chopping block Day 1. Quit imagining.

umm... pretty obvious here that cruelty was talking about some annonomous hypo-scum... why do you answer in #2 as if you are the hypo scum he was talking about?

Because he thinks I'm scum.

I think this whole back and forth between wicked and cruelty is distracting from what we should actually be doing right now: lynching malp.

When has non-contribution every been a good reason to lynch somebody? It's not even a strong scum tell. In fact, on this site, I bet it happens more often with town.

[Wickedestjr]

Mod: In about a week I will have to leave for about 14/15 days, and I will have no computer access. I would really like to continue playing or be temporarily replaced if that is a possibility. However, it is your descision.

[Wickedestjr]

1: Well, I presume there's more than one scum so it's conceivable that your partner(s) wanted him killed and you went along with it. This is a WIFOM deflection at best.

2: I didn't say bandwagoning gives you town credit. You were on a wagon that wasn't a mislynch. You specifically stated you wanted to be on a wagon despite not really liking CK as a lynch that much. There's absolutely no reason for town to do that.

1: First of all, nobody voted CK after I did. So I don't know what you meant by having my scumbuddies going along with it. Also, how could I have possibly planned this out? Odds are if I am scum, then some of my scumbuddies would have been on the Haylen lynch, so all these points look like grasping at straws now that I've completely destroyed your case.

2: So you are saying it would give me town credit for not being on the mislynch? If so, then this is also a bad point, because if anything, it would be better for me to go with what the majority went if I was really worrying about this.

Ok.

[1a: Let me lay this out. Hyposcum-wicked knows that the people on the CK wagon are town. Being on that wagon gives him cred with them (it does, people like when other people agree with them).] [1b: Hyposcum-wicked's partner(s?) don't like something Scott said, and want him lynched. Hyposcum-wicked shrugs, knowing (well, believing) he can't be implicated. Scott dies, cruelty questions Hyposcum-wicked about being on the bandwagon, Hyposcum-wicked points out that Scott died and he therefore must be innocent. Cruelty notes that this isn't a viable defence, Hyposcum-wicked misreps cruelty.]

2: WIFOM/misrep. You specifically stated that you wanted to be on a bandwagon, you also specifically stated that you weren't feeling the CK lynch, in the same post you joined his wagon. Why would town do this? There's literally no logical reason.

1a: Why would I want Scott and Torqez to like me? They were two of the more quiet players. Also, earlier I thoughtthat this was what you meant and you said:

I didn't say bandwagoning gives you town credit. You were on a wagon that wasn't a mislynch. You specifically stated you wanted to be on a wagon despite not really liking CK as a lynch that much. There's absolutely no reason for town to do that.

...So which is it?


1b: How is this reverant? I don't really understand what you are saying here.


2: You are misrepping me now. Where did I say that I wasn't feeling the CK lynch?

1: So scum is ALWAYS anti-town? 2: Or would you concede that occasionally their survival becomes more important than bringing down town?

1: Where the heck did I say that? Stop twisting my words scum.
2: This has absolutely nothing to do with my survival. I wasn't even on the chopping block Day 1. Quit imagining.

1: I didn't say you said that. This is again misrepresentation. I was asking if you would agree that occasionally (or even often?) scum will act in a null or pro-town manner in order to survive.

2: As Rhinox said, I was talking hypothetically. The point I was making was that scum doesn't necessarily always act anti-town; they'd be identified fairly quickly and easily. Interesting response, though.

1: Okay, so let me get this straight, because I have no clue what you are saying. I said that I'd vote CK, because he was my preference, and I'd just let everybody else vote the person they prefer. You asked me how doing that is pro-town. I said it wasn't necessarily pro-town, but that it isn't anti-town, meaning it isn't detrimental to the town. Then you said "So scum is ALWAYS anti-town?" I don't even understand how this question is even reverant. I never said anything about scum. I'm trying to convince the town that I am town.

2: Alright, well if that is what you were asking, then how is that reverant?

Nope, Haylen and CK were below Furry, VistaSoldier, and Katniss on my scumlist.

I read "people that may be good lynch choices" as more important that "people I'd be willing to lynch". This is interesting though.

Apparently putting my suspects in order isn't enough of a give away.

Scum would love to be in a position whereby they can attack townies who were on a wagon that resulted in a mislynch.

This is another bad point.

How so? It's maybe slightly WIFOMish but I don't think any rational person would disagree with it.

It's a bad point not only because it is WIFOMish, because only somebody who doesn't know how to play this game would do that as scum. Why? Because there were 8 people that participated in the lynch bandwagon, which would mean that picking on anybody for it would be unintelligent as town, because clearly there were at least a few townies that did it also. Also, this is an accusation that could be thrown back at scum, because they could be accused of planning this out to make themselves look good. Two other reasons why I dislike this point:

1. I have never seen this happen in any game. Sure, people have used bandwagon analysis, but people never accuse others just for being on the lynch wagon. Have you ever experienced this? It would take a few days to actually make a good accusation such as being on all the lynch wagons, or something like that. Also, the CK wagon was larger at the time of my vote, so I don't know why you are even considering this point.

2. Did I critisice anybody on the Haylen wagon? Nope. My first vote day 2 was for Furry who wasn't on the Haylen wagon. I didn't say anything negative about the Haylen wagoners.

Also, like I keep saying: I was voting Haylen at a moment in time. Why would I want to attack the people who were voting the same person I was?

Also, just noticed this.

However, I think both you and malpascp are town.

mal has nine posts in this entire game. 9 posts in 23 pages. How can you possibly have a read on him? Buddying (with SirChris, probably trying to clear your scumbuddy mal).

My read on malpascp is partly a meta read and partly due to gut. As for Sir Chris, it was a few of his recent posts that made me think he was town. I wasn't buddying him though.

This (below) isn't an attack, just a question.

Occasionally I phrase my attacks as questions. What does it matter though?

Why would you vote him for not contributing after we lynched a townie for that same reason?

So you're going to allow people to lurk because Haylen didn't contribute, got lynched for it and flipped town? Explain how this is a good policy.

Lynching lurkers is only a good move when somebody that was being bandwagoned claimed a power role, and it is a day before deadline. Otherwise, it isn't a good lynch choice. Lurking/not contributing isn't even a reliable scumtell. In my first large normal Mafia 96, none of the scum lurked. Three of the most useless players in that game were Lowell, Mufasa, and Empking's Alt. They were all town-alligned. Lynching lurkers is a bad move.

[Wickedestjr]

Wicked, when doing pbpa, you need to take into context that people change their minds over time.

What action of mine was this directed at?

Also, Wicked, you said ud explain something when I return.

I was going to explain when you responded to this:

Later we get a 'case'

Crueknight has only spammed
and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.
His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

-Spamming (which almost everyone was doing)
-Defending himself "dumbly" (what exactly is 'dumbly' and why is it a tell?)
-Random/selfvote (why is this a tell?)

Rhinox, what exactly made malpascp's vote the worst?

1: He's acting a bit scummy and a 2: little too eager for information...

1: How? Anything in particular?

2: Can you explain where I was doing this? Also, why does it mean I'm scum?

I find it interesting that the only people who would seem to want Scott brosius dead are CrueKnight and Furry. Scott Brosius only posted a couple of times. So actually...
unvote
vote:CrueKnight

Why do you choose CK and not Furry?


I really dislike SolemnJ's vote for CK. Not because I think CK is town, but because the accusationn relies around Furry being scum, which would imply that Furry is the better choice.

[Wickedestjr]

Well, basically, the first four pages were part of the RVS and then Mr. Squirrel started getting annoyed by the questions I was asking to get us out of the RVS. Then me and him got into this argument which got us out of the RVS. He became quiet, and then I started to suspect CrueKnight, and later started a bandwagon on him. Meanwhile, a player named Haylen was contributing nothing, and she was making inconsistent excuses. It was a few days before deadline I think, and I voted CK because he was the bandwagon I liked the most. In the end, Haylen got lynched. Day 2 cruelty started attacking me for not voting my top suspect, but instead joining the bandwagon I liked. Now we have gotten into a long argument.

That is my summary, but I may have left out some other important things.

[Wickedestjr]

EBWOP: That was directed at mike.

[Wickedestjr]

Is this fucking serious? So b/c ONE townie does it, it means it's not scummy? Really Wicked? Oh god this is unbelievably bad.

Lurking/not contributing is a stupid reason to lynch a player for in general anyway. How is that opinion "unbelievably bad"?

Its a non-sequitor because you can't form an argument that players who are non-contributing are likely to be town based on the single occurance of 1 town non-contributing player.

I'm not saying he's likely to be town, I'm just saying it doesn't mean he's scum.

1: Wait I thought you just said that haylen was lynched for her excuses and not her non-contribution? I don't recall voting malp for neither excuses nor non-contribution...

Yes, Haylen was lynched for her excuses, but she also didn't contribute. But, even though we didn't lynch her for that, it still shows that townies do it.

2: Please direct me to where I said I was voting malp for non-contribution...

Why are you misrepping the reasons for my desire to lynch malp?

I apologize. I confused your vote with the other votes for non-contribution.

And in post 599, if I understand correctly, you're taking issue with cruelty claiming to have started the wagon when the reason haylen was lynched was not his own reason? Okay, well its interesting, but I don't see it as big of a deal as you're making it out to be. I don't see this as cruelty attempting to say that he took a strong stand on the haylen wagon, I interpret this as cruelty's response to your accusation that he kept his vote on haylen after he expressed a desire not to have her lynched.

You are forgetting that cruelty made the comment that he had started the wagon after I had made a comment regarding his stance.

wicked: why was crueknight a better lynch choice yesterday than haylen, ignoring the obvious now known fact that haylen was town?

I had a gut read telling me that Haylen was town, but the evidence pointing to scumHaylen was just too much for me to follow my gut read, so that's why I had her high up on my list of suspects. CrueKnight on the other hand, I had gotten a scum gut read from and evidence that pointed to him being scum. That is why he was my preference.

Why aren't you today pursuing your top 3 suspects from yesterday: foilist, Furry, and Katniss/Cades?

First of all, I have been pursuing my suspicion of Furry, but foilist and cades can't excuse the actions of their predecessors, and their predecessors' actions were the ones that made me suspicious, so there is really nothing I can do about that. cruelty has rose to the top of my suspect list, mostly because of today's actions plus a few sudden epiphanies.

After rereading, I've also come to the conclusion that whoever the scum are, they aren't exactly the brightest lot... more on this later in the game if/when a certain event happens.

I'm curious:

1. Why did you make this comment?

2. Does this imply that you think you know who the scum are?

Well I agreed with foilist's reason for voting. I also missed the actual "picking a wagon" part, so I guess it's slightly better but not hugely.

Wait, but you said this:

What I find funny is that had I jumped on the Haylen bandwagon, you most likely would have had no problems with it, as I believe there were several other players that did, and you didn't attack any of them.

I would have if you'd said that Haylen was only your fourth suspect.

So....?


Furry, please respond to post 551.

@the rest of the town - What are your thoughs on 551?

[Wickedestjr]

@Wicked: Probably one of them before I made that post. It'd be hard to find it. Tell me the page I made the post.

You made the post on page 23.


Now that SolemnJ has defended himself, I will explain why I believe that Furry misrepresented it. He took this:

Crueknight has only spammed
and defended himself. And was kinda dumb about it, too.
His voting pattern consists of his random vote, and then his self vote.

He fits my mold of scum/badtown.

and broke it into three parts, that when they each stand alone, don't mean much, but together, actually make a good case for somebody that likes lynching people that don't contribute. For example, the second point would be a terrible point alone. Obviously defending yourself isn't a scumtell, because it prevents the town from mislynching a townie. However, it is more meaningful when the other points are added to it. CK spent most of his posts defending himself, which was the point I believe SolemnJ was trying to show, and Furry ignored that.

And as for the last part, my accusation relies around Furry being scum, yes. This would bring one to think that we should lynch Furry first to lynch CK, but for two reasons, I prefer the reverse:

1. Furry is contributing more. This means whether or not he is scum, its better he survives, thx to his wonderful amassment of knowledge of who is scum and town.

2. Furry isnt as scummy as CK.

Two questions:

1. Why isn't Furry as scummy as CK?

2. Do you like Furry's contributions so far in the game? If so, what in particular?

[Wickedestjr]

mike, can you give your thoughs on cruelty?

1: My main question to Wicked is why would you not vote your top suspect, instead of just going with whatever bandwagon seemed fitting? 2: That's seems more like you don't care who really gets lynched, just pick one. 3: If you had a really strong feeling about your top suspect I think you should have pursued it better.

Wow thanks for reading the thread.

1: I have explained this many many many many times. We were few days away from deadline, and I didn't think I could convince anybody to vote anybody other than CK or Haylen since they were the two most popular bandwagons.

2: As long as somebody's high up on my scumlist and its not LyLo or MyLo, then I'm fine with their lynch. Especially on day 1, when the first lynch gives us the information that we can actually use to get a better idea of who's scum.

3: Who? foilist which had nothing against him apart from his predecessor's actions? Or, Katniss/cades who hasn't posted in a long time? Or Furry who everybody thought was town apart from me and SolemnJ?


kunkstar, can you give your opinion on CK?

1: He's acting a bit scummy and a 2: little too eager for information...

1: How? Anything in particular?

2: Can you explain where I was doing this? Also, why does it mean I'm scum?

Well, I'm not voting for you anymore, so I obviously thought I could make a stronger case elsewhere.

This makes me think you don't know your own case. Also, are you saying you don't think I'm scum anymore?

Scott Brosius was an odd kill choice btw.

I think it might have been because he had really nothing that could be used against him or he wasn't attracting lots of attention or something along those lines.


Faraday, if malpascp's behavior is scummy enough to vote for him, then why not vote dana or cades?


Rhinox, where did you give your reasons for your Haylen vote, and was Sir Chris's vote for Haylen better than malpascp's?

[Wickedestjr]

Also, are you saying you don't think I'm scum anymore?

Yep. Absolutely

Well, can you please explain why you were suspicious of me at the time?

I never really spelled out exactly my reasons for voting haylen, nor for why my vote remained on haylen.

So, what made your vote better than malpascp's?

[Wickedestjr]

We were few days away from deadline, and I didn't think I could convince anybody to vote anybody other than CK or Haylen since they were the two most popular bandwagons.

This right here is a scumtell. You didn't even try - you were happy with someone you didn't really want lynched (relatively) and you didn't attempt to scumhunt/push the wagon after your vote. A few days is ample opportunity to build a convincing case. The fact that you were apathetic about who was ultimately lynched is hugely scummy.

It is not a scumtell. I tried to push another lynch before we got close to deadline. If that doesn't work, what's pushing at deadline going to do? It'll only slow things down.

I had a gut read telling me that Haylen was town

Why didn't you try to stop her lynch then?

Maybe you'd know if you hadn't gotten rid of the rest of that sentence:

I had a gut read telling me that Haylen was town,

but the evidence pointing to scumHaylen was just too much for me to follow my gut read, so that's why I had her high up on my list of suspects.

Stop taking me out of context scum.

cruelty has rose to the top of my suspect list, mostly because of today's actions plus a few sudden epiphanies.

The absence of elaboration (specifically regarding these "epiphanies") makes me wonder why you'd even say this - you think I'm suspicious and you've had these mind blowing realisations, yet you aren't sharing them? This isn't the wicked I know.

Those epiphanies weren't really anything I felt the need to share. I mostly just realized that I hadn't been giving you enough attention, and you seemed to be flying under the radar, which caught my attention. Then you made this terrible case, and have reiterated several points in an attempt to generate circular arguments that'll never end.

Lurking/not contributing is a stupid reason to lynch a player for in general anyway. How is that opinion "unbelievably bad"?

1: It sets a precedent for scum; lurk and we won't lynch you.
2: Lack of contribution is pro-town how?

1: A change in behavior

would

be scummy. I also doubt it would change anything anyway.
2: Where did I say it was?


Will finish later.

[Wickedestjr]

Yeah, wicked you should probably pick a bandwagon now.

Thanks for reminding me. I just noticed something interesting that happened on page 9: 5 votes were all cast for CrueKnight in just 20 posts. This probably means that CK is town. It also means that there are probably scum that wagoned in those 20 posts. I no longer support that bandwagon.

Also, that leaves the bandwagon on kunkstar, which I also dislike, because it all boils down to not contributing which is a TERRIBLE reason to lynch somebody for.


Here are my candidates:

Vote: cruelty
Vote: Furry
Vote: mike

mike is in there because of:

1. VistaSoldier's actions.
2. A little gut.
3. POE

...just in case you were wondering.

Faraday, if malpascp's behavior is scummy enough to vote for him, then why not vote dana or cades?

I've only got one vote.

Why did you choose malpascp then? You are voting him for not contributing, but cades is guiltier when it comes to contributing. I don't understand at all.

I have to disagree with this however. If you have legit information and true evidence that someone who is on the top of your suspect list, you should always pursue it unless the bandwagon also had someone on your list.

First of all, you

were

on my list at the time. So where did this come from? Also, I spent the whole day 1 trying to persuade the town to vote my top suspect as much as everybody else did, but it didn't work. So if I can't do it in two weeks, what's pushing as hard as I can for it in just a few days going to do? I've had seven games to test my ability of persuasion. This game is hardly any different. This is probably the 4th or 5th time I have said this.

2. He seems to be asking too many nonsensical questions that don't go anywhere. He needs to do the digging himself instead of overusing the word "why".

Check out my previous seven games. I play like this in almost all of them. It is my meta, so it doesn't mean I'm necessarily scum if I do it here. Why do I do it? Because the more evidence the better.

There are a few I can pinch at...

Such as? Care to do any scumhunting?

You had her high on your list, still not top 4. Why then, despite the presence of a gut read, did you not pursue the possibility that Haylen was town in order to prevent her lynch?

I'll bring that quote back up:

I had a gut read telling me that Haylen was town, but

the evidence pointing to scumHaylen was just too much for me to follow my gut read,

so that's why I had her high up on my list of suspects.

Learn to read.

Conversely, given this gut town read on the most popular wagon, why did you not try to push the CK wagon over the last few days? Why did you go into shutdown mode? Limited time is not an excuse here, it's bad, bad play to apathetically let someone you suspect is town get lynched.

I've explained why I don't think I was capable of doing it.

1: Wouldn't this be a GOOD thing? 2: You just stated you had a gut town-read on the wagon that eventually rolled to the mislynch.

1: No. Less time to get somebody lynched is bad.

2: Read carefully. My gut was telling me that Haylen was town, but if I had to guess what she'd flip, I would have gambled that she'd flip scum. I had no reason to stop the lynch because :

a.) I doubted I'd be able to.

b.) I felt no reason to anyway, because she was a suspect of mine.

[Wickedestjr]

Alright. This is my last day here, and I didn't have the time to catch up completely, but I'll switch my vote to a place where it serves a good purpose. In this case, I like the cades votes the best, even though cruelty is one of the people voting him:

Unvote Vote:cades

When I return it should be day 3, so I will be crossing my fingers that we vote off scum.

[Wickedestjr]

Good game scum. Thanks for modding Kdub. Glad to see I was right about Furry and VistaSoldier/mikeburnfire. Furry, good job bussing SolemnJ. That was one of the main reasons that I felt so strongly about SolemnJ being town. Furry also managed to make me reconsider him several times. He played well.