Mini 863 - Space Station Mafia: GAME OVER - EVERYONE'S DEAD

[Looker]

D1 doesn't vote; D2 lynches CoolDog; D3, tries to lynch me - come on, now, Empking's obvscum. I seriously believe there's a safeclaim going on somewhere.

[Looker]

unvote
vote Looker

So did I.

Well damn it I'm PMing the Mod to see what's going on here

[Looker]

Hate to be all "I'm tellin' Mod!" but I'm confused

[Messiah]

Looker, what are you asking the mod?

[charlatan]

Sorry for getting back to the game late, everyone. My birthday was this weekend, so I was a bit distracted.

I'm probably going to double post, firstly dealing with Looker and then addressing other concerns in the second post (not sure how long I have before I need to run off for the evening, and I don't want to get any more behind.)

On top of that, the three main suspects yesterday were CoolDog, Sposh, and Empking, and now the other two are dead. Maybe Almaster's Mafia, I don't know.

From my point of view, that does nothing to increase the likelihood of Empking being scum. In your opinion, what does hyposcum Empking gain by eliminating both of yesterday's vote magnets?

D1 doesn't vote; D2 lynches CoolDog; D3, tries to lynch me - come on, now, Empking's obvscum. I seriously believe there's a safeclaim going on somewhere.

Day 1, agreed, does not help him. Day 2, several of us (myself included) voted CooLDoG. Is there a particular reason you think his vote on CooLDoG was questionable? What makes him more likely to be scummy for it than simply wrong? Your Day 3 point is useless; we don't know your alignment.

My main issue is that even if you're a vanilla townie and got your role PM after it was de-flavored, it should have been fairly obvious from the reactions to Empking's claim that his pre-de-flavoring flavor (wtf) was legit. I obviously cannot disprove safeclaims being a possibility, but my instinct is to think that this is not the kind of game we would be likely to see them in.

Two quick observations: (I can go into detail if you would like)

Please do.

1) NAW's blatent avoidance of the hiphop wagon. I noted this quote earlier in the game.

What quote?

Charlatan: Can I get your opinions on Looker? Does she need to die?

I don't know yet. It's a possibility, but I am leaning towards no, or at the very least "not yet". For one, she just became a very easy lynch target, and my experience has been that the easy lynch is too often the wrong lynch (even in this game.)

@Howard: Are you saying that when you got your role you received the original flavor as well?

[charlatan]

Almaster: Your last post was completely confusing to me. I cannot follow what your numbered statements are supposed to be responses to. I eagerly await sober clarification, but in the meantime, I am curious about your vote:

1) Lurking - No. See Peabody for an example of actual lurking.

4) Didn't mention NAW lurking - and you didn't mention Peabody's lurking. So what?

Is this vote based on lurking, or is there more to it? There are better reasons to vote Peabody today than lurking, especially since nobody is lurking too badly in this game anymore.

I agree with HowardRoark's 681. I'm happy to revisit this avenue of investigation as well, in part as a result of yesterday's flavor situation. I find it very odd, for instance, that you would hammer based on a plain vanilla townie claim when you claimed in exactly the same fashion (minus the "ice cream" part.) You said it "did not occur to you" to include your previous flavor when you claimed, but were happy to "verify it" (in a way, kind of artificially claiming it after the fact) for Looker. If you had said you thought it game-breaking or kind of uncool to include your old flavor, I could have gotten behind that. Because, in all honesty, I found it to be both of those things (nothing personal, Empking) -- but you didn't. I find it unlikely that you would just forget something that could very easily confirm you to other vanilla townies.

Vote: AlmasterGM

--

@Hoopla: Why ask me specifically, as opposed to anyone else?

--

@milkshake: Why no vote? And can you explain your Peabody case?

--

@Looker: I forgot one other thing. You were bringing up safeclaims at the end of yesterday, too, but at the time seemed to find milkshake more likely to be scum than Empking, at least as evidenced by your vote. (Alternately, you may have found milkshake more viable since the Empking wagon had just been deflated.) Was it only CooLDoG's flip that caused you to reverse your stance?

[Looker]

Looker, what are you asking the mod?

Whether or not I received the correct format of role pm because it's only one sentence and very ambiguous.

Sorry for getting back to the game late, everyone. My birthday was this weekend, so I was a bit distracted.

I'm probably going to double post, firstly dealing with Looker and then addressing other concerns in the second post (not sure how long I have before I need to run off for the evening, and I don't want to get any more behind.)

On top of that, the three main suspects yesterday were CoolDog, Sposh, and Empking, and now the other two are dead. Maybe Almaster's Mafia, I don't know.

From my point of view, that does nothing to increase the likelihood of Empking being scum. In your opinion, what does hyposcum Empking gain by eliminating both of yesterday's vote magnets?

On top of that, the three main suspects yesterday were CoolDog, Sposh, and Empking, and now the other two are dead.

Maybe Almaster's Mafia

, I don't know. Confused, just responding to your request for elaboration if somewhat half-heartedly.

@Looker: I forgot one other thing. You were bringing up safeclaims at the end of yesterday, too, but at the time seemed to find milkshake more likely to be scum than Empking, at least as evidenced by your vote. (Alternately, you may have found milkshake more viable since the Empking wagon had just been deflated.) Was it only CooLDoG's flip that caused you to reverse your stance?

I knew one of them was Milk's partner, I just didn't know which.


And it was Almaster who said he verified the claims. What kind of sick, twisted plot

is

this? (It's like trying to untangle a very knotted knot)

Hahahaha, if CoolDoG flips scum, you're going to be in a bit of trouble, Peabody.

He's actually in trouble regardless of whether or not CoolDoG flips scum.

But wouldn't that take three people to verify? Couldn't both Empking and Milk be corroborating with each other? This is all post-lynch speculation, though, of course. Let's see the verdict.

I'll verify it.

O, and

why am I at L-1?!?!?

(Let it be known Empking's on my wagon)

[Looker]

EBWOP: Generic - it's very generic.

[lobstermania]

Day Three Vote Count #1

- as of post 707

AlmasterGM (1):

charlatan

Empking (1):

Looker

Peabody (1):

AlmasterGM

Looker (4):

Hoopla, Peabody, Empking, HowardRoark

Not Voting (3):

HowardRoark, Messiah, milkshake

Note: Replacements did not receive the original role titles, nor were they informed about them.

With nine alive it takes five votes to lynch.

[Hoopla]

A thought: If scum were given safe claims, or an insight into what the town PM's contained, why didn't hiphop use it when he claimed on Day 1?

[AlmasterGM]

* Lurking through most of D1 (especially the Hoopla gambit).

This argument has no uniqueness - lots of people were lurking, including, but not limited to, Peabody. Lurkers like Sposh flipped town. Moreover, I was quiet during the "Hoopla gambit" because I was on board with it and had nothing else to say. I also don't even think I was that silent - I did a fair bit of talking on D1, and plenty on D2.

Here are your comments on the two: 35, 106, 172, 174, 209. Not much in the way of "legitimate arguments" for either of them being scum.

Yeah, so I'm starting to sense a repeat of the same arguments people made against me yesterday. First, just because every post I make that references them isn't content-loaded doesn't mean some of them are. At the point where I gave reasons as to why I suspected them both, I don't see why I am being indicted for this. Second, even if my posts weren't of A+ quality, they weren't comparatively worse than the other posts surrounding them - what other options did we have, Hoopla's softclaim? Finally, why is this a scumtell?

Gently positioning yourself on the hiphop wagon without furthering it.

First, how does this relate to my 275 that you quoted? Second, obviously the hammer isn't going to "further the wagon" … it ends it.

* Why no focus on NewAgeWarrior's lack of participation?

I felt that, compared to the other lurkers, NAW had made decent contributions in the early game … so I wasn't as quick to hound him. Nobody else really focused on him either. Not seeing the tell here.

(With a vote on Sposh.) Why is Messiah scummier Peabody? You hadn't mentioned him. Also, NewAgeWarrior is third towniest without reason.

I don't remember, that list was posted awhile ago. Re NAW: I didn't give reasons for more than half of them, so why are you singling him out?

You also claim "vanilla town" at L-2.

So?

* You drop a lot of AtE in your posts.

Needs evidence.

Not sure why you are picking out CooLDoG when there are three others (beside Sposh) scummier on your list.

This is a clear misunderstanding of how a scumlist functions. It's not a vote-order, it's a general scale. If I could only vote for people at the top of the list without being scummy, then my vote would be forced onto the first person at all times. There's no reason why I can't agree to vote CoolDoG.

* You are very active when you are under pressure D2, but once it subsides, you begin to disappear again.

I never disappeared - I continually reasserted that I was still fine with my Sposh case. The game was stagnating at that point, so there wasn't much else for me (or anyone) to do.

Unvote.

I still don't like Peabody. I'd hammer Looker right now, but that'd probably cause a massive uproar, so I won't.

[Messiah]

I'd really like to vote Looker right now, but it appears that she's at L-1. She makes a far-fetched assumption to justify refusing to believe Empking is confirmed, and I can only see scum motivation for doing so.

[Hoopla]

Since we have a majority with Messiah expressing interest in a Looker lynch, she ought to claim. Please nobody hammer until we have sufficient conversation about her and other possibilities.

[milkshake]

Honestly I, too, would be OK with voting Looker, but don't exactly want to hammer, which makes three of us. I'd ask for a claim, but looker has practically claimed VT, hasn't he?

Post 709 is a good point.

[milkshake]

Grr, simulpost point-syphoning.

[charlatan]

A Looker claim would probably help clarify. She is probably the right choice, but I don't like that she jumped to L-1 in a page, even despite the extremely dubious stance towards Empking and Milkshake. Her reply in 706 only makes it worse -- for the most part she ignored the points I raised, and then there's this:

I knew one of them was Milk's partner, I just didn't know which.

So if she's still working from the assumption that Milkshake is scum, she should absolutely be voting Milkshake rather than taking a 50/50 on Empking or Almaster, the two possible partners in her hypothetical situation. Barring real fireworks in the next little bit, I too will be fine hammering her. But we've seen wackiness in this game in terms of role PMs, and we have no reason to rush.

@Almaster: in the meantime, no response to the points I've raised?

[Looker]

Unvote.

I still don't like Peabody. I'd hammer Looker right now, but that'd probably cause a massive uproar, so I won't.

Are you testing the waters? Either way, you didn't say anything at all about me in your post but feel the need to vote me. (Don't take that as an inquiry as to why)

I'd really like to vote Looker right now, but it appears that she's at L-1. She makes a far-fetched assumption to justify refusing to believe Empking is confirmed, and I can only see scum motivation for doing so.

What kind of scum motivation? Pray tell...

Since we have a majority with Messiah expressing interest in a Looker lynch, she ought to claim. Please nobody hammer until we have sufficient conversation about her and other possibilities.

I'm Town. That is the paraphrased jist of the ongoing convo with Lobstermania. I asked if I had the correct role pm format and he said my role pm was correct - I'm Town. He made no mention of Passive Astronaughts or any vanillaness or anything. He just said I'm Town.

Honestly I, too, would be OK with voting Looker, but don't exactly want to hammer, which makes three of us. I'd ask for a claim, but looker has practically claimed VT, hasn't he?

Post 709 is a good point.

I agree, Post 709

is

a good point. The plot(/knot) thickens...

A Looker claim would probably help clarify. She is probably the right choice, but I don't like that she jumped to L-1 in a page, even despite the extremely dubious stance towards Empking and Milkshake. Her reply in 706 only makes it worse -- for the most part she ignored the points I raised, and then there's this:

I knew one of them was Milk's partner, I just didn't know which.

So if she's still working from the assumption that Milkshake is scum, she should absolutely be voting Milkshake rather than taking a 50/50 on Empking or Almaster, the two possible partners in her hypothetical situation. Barring real fireworks in the next little bit, I too will be fine hammering her. But we've seen wackiness in this game in terms of role PMs, and we have no reason to rush.

@Almaster: in the meantime, no response to the points I've raised?

I have no problem dying, I just want to be right about Empking, that's all. So please, if/once I'm lynched, reconsider Empking as Mafia. PLEEEEZ

[HowardRoark]

@Howard: Are you saying that when you got your role you received the original flavor as well?

When I replaced into this game my role PM included the flavored and standard role name.

---

At the point where I gave reasons as to why I suspected them both, I don't see why I am being indicted for this.

My point is that you didn't give any solid reasons for wanting them lynched.

First, how does this relate to my 275 that you quoted? Second, obviously the hammer isn't going to "further the wagon" … it ends it.

While you were tossing out, "Hey let's lynch Peabody because he is annoying," you were also giving us, "liking hiphop less and less." That's gently positioning . . . hammer or not.

I felt that, compared to the other lurkers, NAW had made decent contributions in the early game … so I wasn't as quick to hound him. Nobody else really focused on him either. Not seeing the tell here.

No tell, just a bit of possible linkage.

NAW: I didn't give reasons for more than half of them, so why are you singling him out?

Because you don't really interact not comment on him.

You also claim "vanilla town" at L-2.

So?

Take a look at my post 675. Answer that. Then tell me why you felt the need to claim at L-2 without being asked. (Psssst. That's generally a scum tell.)

Not sure why you are picking out CooLDoG when there are three others (beside Sposh) scummier on your list.

This is a clear misunderstanding of how a scumlist functions. It's not a vote-order, it's a general scale.

Sure, theirs room for flexibility. But when you skip over that many supposedly scummier people . . . it kinda stands out.

[Looker]

Alright then, nobody hammer. Currently going back and forth via PM with the Mod.

[Hoopla]

Alright then, nobody hammer. Currently going back and forth via PM with the Mod.

I look forward to hearing what you are allowed to say about the situation.

--

As a side note, is it weird that the roles are being flipped as 'town' and 'mafia'? milkshake or Empking, can you confirm that your newer role is just 'town'?

[milkshake]

Correct, according to the de-theming PM, my role name was switched to simply "town." And the mafia it discusses are no longer space crazed.

[Hoopla]

Unvote

for now.

I don't like how easy this feels. I want to think this over.

[Messiah]

Note: Replacements did not receive the original role titles, nor were they informed about them.

When I replaced into this game my role PM included the flavored and standard role name.

What's going on here?

---

What kind of scum motivation?

Scum don't want confirmed townies running around.

[AlmasterGM]

Note: Replacements did not receive the original role titles, nor were they informed about them.

When I replaced into this game my role PM included the flavored and standard role name.

Seconded.

Response to other posts coming later.

[milkshake]

Note: Replacements did not receive the original role titles, nor were they informed about them.

When I replaced into this game my role PM included the flavored and standard role name.

Hm. I guess this means we should be lynching HowardRoark? I'm suprised scum would just up and lie like that, though.