Mini 891 - British Comedy Mafia (Game Over)

[MacavityLock]

For future reference: I agree that voting NL, especially this early, is scummy.

Why?

[MacavityLock]

Given that we have three weeks to discuss things and lynch someone, voting no-lunch this early is extremely anti-town, because it deprives us of finding information and potentially lynching scum.

How is voting No Lynch at this stage of the game, placing it at L-6, depriving us of information? Did you think that his vote would stay on No Lynch?

P.S. Anyone voting No

Lunch

immediately gets my vote. I love a good sandwich.

[MacavityLock]

I figured if I voted him, his vote might move; also, a pressure vote such as that tends to elicit information. Surely I don't have to explain that to you?

No sir, you do not.

Additionally (for clarity), to me, anti-town != scummy.

Interesting. So then, Fuzzy was both?

For future reference: I agree that voting NL, especially this early, is

scummy

.

Given that we have three weeks to discuss things and lynch someone, voting no-lunch this early is extremely

anti-town

, because it deprives us of finding information and potentially lynching scum.

Vote: Lyman

[MacavityLock]

High-fives!

Also I missed earlier that Lyman actually entirely avoided answering my question:

How is voting No Lynch at this stage of the game, placing it at L-6, depriving us of information?

I figured if I voted him, his vote might move; also, a pressure vote such as that tends to elicit information.

Yes, his vote might move, but that would be true whether had earlier voted No Lynch, randomly voted for a player, or didn't drop a vote. No Lynch isn't any more anti-info in this regard.

[MacavityLock]

Also, Lyman's post 39 is entirely "Hey guys, look over there!"

The fact is that Lyman went out of his way to point out that he was saying that anti-town is different from scummy, likely not realizing that he had used both to describe Fuzzy's No Lynch vote. I don't particularly care that he voted Fuzzy for the No Lynch vote. I care that he obviously manufactured his reason for doing so. Basically, so far his explanation is "No Lynch in the RVs is scummy, I mean anti-town, because it fails to give us information, I mean because it stops discussion*, I mean because it's different from what I'm used to seeing." He's twisting in the wind, and it's only page two.

*Note that Fuzzy's No Lynch vote was very obvious in that it was trying to elicit discussion.

I think that voting for no-lynch is scummy, whatever it's in the rvs or mid-day.

Why?

And I'm not seeing how such pressure formed on Josh for those posts. I'm even more suspicious of Budja jumping in the wagon.

Why Budja and not imag or me?

[MacavityLock]

@Budja: Your vote might be just a bit more than a random vote, but still, it is there. I don't like "I random voted in a wagon!" either.

Why not?

Why do I think fuzzy voted for a no-lynch? The hell I know. I only know that he did something I consider a scumtell. And that's enough.

Does context play any role in your scumhunting?

[MacavityLock]

@Budja: Your vote might be just a bit more than a random vote, but still, it is there. I don't like "I random voted in a wagon!" either.

Why not?

When you throw in a random vote in a forming serious wagon, you are just being opportunistic.

Why do I think fuzzy voted for a no-lynch? The hell I know. I only know that he did something I consider a scumtell. And that's enough.

Does context play any role in your scumhunting?

Please explain, as currently I am not understanding what you want to ask me (and neither how that question has any relation with what you quoted.)

Budja's 70 is pretty much exactly what I was going to say. 1) Budja's vote on Fuzzy was clearly not random, as he quite specifically explained why he voted. So, why was this vote opportunistic? 2) You said that you consider Fuzzy voting No Lynch a scumtell. Why didn't you examine the context of said vote? As Budja said, and I agree with, it was very clearly an attempt to leave the RVs.

Snow_Bunny, on another note, we've now had a player do the same wagon-jumping as Budja, only far more egregious. Chinaman

random

-voted Fuzzy on page 1 (4th vote), and has now jumped to the Lyman-wagon (5th vote). SB, is this opportunistic? Is it scummy? Is it scummier than Budja? Why haven't you commented on it?

(By the way, welcome BC.)

[MacavityLock]

Chinaman

random

-voted Fuzzy on page 1 (4th vote)

How does some one's random vote happen to be the fourth vote on some one?

Take a look at Chinaman's Fuzzy-vote post. It's quite clear that Chinaman had no legitimate stated reason for it, therefore I called it random. I obviously don't know his actual reason for the vote, but of course there probably is one. The point I was trying to make is that between Budja's Fuzzy-vote and Chinaman's, Chinaman's should be more likely to trigger

When you throw in a random vote in a forming serious wagon, you are just being opportunistic.

[MacavityLock]

Chinaman, you do realize that you're calling for more Lyman votes while he is unclaimed at L-1?

[MacavityLock]

Unvote

for the moment. I need to dig in to the last couple pages, which judging from a skim, have been eventful.

[MacavityLock]

We need imag's questions answered before we lynch.

@Mod, two questions.

Supposing Josh does have the ability he claims:

1. If he targets someone tonight who is targeted for a kill, is that player killed or treestumped?

2. If he treestumps someone tonight who has an investigative role, does that player get the results of their action?

If necessary, I'm okay with them being answered not directly by mod, but filtered through Lyman.

Right now, I'm thinking that if Lyman is around tonight, he should not be using this treestumping shot tonight. Saving it for later, once we've got fewer targets is probably a better idea.

Even if he has the ability, I wouldn't recommend it. The benefit of this will be having a confirmed innocent scumhunter, and I doubt that if Lyman were in that position the town would follow his lead.

so who would you suggest?

Imaginality...I think he's probably our best pick, given the limited set of players that we have. Alternatively, I guess that I could always replace out and see about setting something up with a player you folks would trust more, having them replace me and then Lyman using his ability...

Neto is so bloody wrong here. 1) We should at least be trying to hit scum. 2) If we fail to hit scum, we should be clearing someone under real suspicion. How can requesting what is essentially a vig on someone who is basically under no suspicion be a townie point of view?

I have no interest in a Budja wagon right now and feel like a

Vote: Neto

is in order.

[MacavityLock]

You know what else is useful? Dead scum.

[MacavityLock]

We don't essentially kill them. The primary function of killing a player in Mafia is removing them from the game.

They are removed for winning condition purposes. I don't give a crap what they say or don't say. It's a vig with the additional benefit of potential scumhunting from beyond the grave.

[MacavityLock]

@mod

, I am currently voting for Neto, but neither my vote nor my name are listed in the vote count.

[MacavityLock]

I have no interest in a Budja wagon right now and feel like a

Vote: Neto

is in order.

Then, what's your stance on Budja? Do you think he's town?

I'm not interested in a Budja lynch, and that's all I'm going to say for now.

Something feels off about this second Lyman-wagon. I need to figure out what it is. His stumping does seem at least partially testable, and I didn't see any major contradictions in the claim, though I need to double-check this.

sorry, I know this isn't original, but I still think it's right. In fact I don't understand the Budja wagon

vote: Josh Lyman

Reasons please?

By the way, welcome to the game. Should I abbreviate you as dan or dana? Is Dana killing me, or is Dan a-killing me?

[MacavityLock]

DS, who are you replacing?

[MacavityLock]

My apologies, my head isn't in this game right now. I'll try to put something together for tomorrow or Wednesday.

[MacavityLock]

All in all I don't like this power in a non-tree stump game due to the fact of our town PR's are in danger more than the scum. Especially if we are telling him to prove it on N1.

Why are town PRs more in danger than scum?

dana and China, what are your feelings on one shot vigs? China, is yours summed up in the following?

Call it a stumping PR or call it a vig PR, I don't really care for either in the town's hands. The only people who can be sure of who they are killing/stumping are the scum and townie vig's/stumpers are just shooting in the dark.

Have you ever played in a game with a pro-town vig?

It's possible, but I'm leaning towards he not having it. Would he really have it, I think it's a town PR. But again, I don't think he has it. Seems like a good scum gambit where he comes D2 and claims that scum just killed the same target he stumped.

Why do you think this is more likely than Lyman telling the truth? Also, if you are town and Lyman is scum, why would you give him this idea?

Also, thinking last night about this role. Let's say Josh uses it and hits scum. That means we have a confirmed scum that is allowed to continue posting but not vote? What is the point of that? Obviously no one would pay attention to that player from that point on. Makes no sense, either he is lying about there being a flip, or he is lying about his role.

Why does this automatically mean that he's lying? Where in the rules is a dead but talking scum explicitly disallowed?

After some re-reading, my vote on Neto is misguided.

Unvote.

Neto, you made some silly arguments re: stumping (you don't vig, or even treestump, someone who isn't under suspicion i.e. imag), but in general I agree with your side of the stumping debate.

We need to get things clear. imag said it best: As far as we can tell, Lyman is claiming that he has the ability to vig someone, but in doing so will give them unlimited "bah" posts. This is essentially a vig. Adjust your theories, setup specs, etc accordingly.

Lyman, upon further thought, I'd say feel free to use your stumping ability whenever it feels right, including tonight if you like. I will expect a complete explanation of whether or not you used it and on who in your first post tomorrow. You're not off the hook, but I'm happy to see you live another day.

There's got to be scum on the 2nd Lyman wagon. dana's vote was weak, but I need more from him before deciding whether or not he's scum. I don't particularly like the way either Chinaman's or BC's entered and stayed on/bounced back to Lyman. But I haven't had much problem with BC's posting. I could maybe vote for Chinaman. But I think I'm going to

Vote: Snow_Bunny

. She both stayed off the first Lyman-wagon and jumped onto the second for the wrong reasons.

[MacavityLock]

Wow, well, first I'll answer your questions even though you didn't answer mine (though I can get the just of how you'd answer it from your post, you didn't answer it directly but w/e).

I didn't see any direct questions to me. If I missed them, my bad, but please let me know.

Lets say that only half of the town have PR's (though I'd be willing to bet more). That's 4 town PR's to 3 scum with or without PR's.

What? Why so many? How many games have you played with so many PRs? How many games have you played with fewer?

Pure odds say that if JL just shoots from the hip, he most likely hits a town PR over a scum and definitely more likely hits a townie over scum. That's if it's used today. That's if he has it at all. That's why I say it's not good for town. Was that too hard for you to follow THIS time?

Yes, a vig more likely hits a townie, and that will pretty much always be true for any vig. If he doesn't have that power, it can't hurt us, so that complaint doesn't apply.

Second question, yes, my opinion was summed up in the part you quoted me and yes I have played with them. I never see it hit scum on D1.

I have. I was scum hit with a vig night 1 in another game. Very sad for me. But that's really neither here nor there.

Secondly, I don't even believe him and I think he's scummy for other reasons. One not unimportant reason is because I have seen ZERO scumhunting from him. NONE! Add that with AtE and his nack for agreeing with anyone who questions his posts, I say he's a mighty fine lynch

The no scumhunting is a totally fair point, in addition to the contradictions noted earlier in the day. I definitely still have an eye on him. However, I do think that if Lyman does have this power, it is likely to be a town PR. I have seen a game with a scum vig in addition to their regular kill, but I think it would be entirely unbalanced in a mini. There is an off-chance that stumping is the mafia (or maybe even SK) kill method. Either way, more information will be gathered overnight based on kills and stumps.

Also, explain to me how you are certain there is scum on his wagon? It is quite possible that JL isn't lynched yet do to scum NOT being on his wagon...you know, cuz he's scum.

Sure, but even if he is scum, do you think it's unlikely that there's busing going on? It's a gut read based on how the wagons formed.

Also, I caught this nice little quote from you earlier

Right now, I'm thinking that if Lyman is around tonight, he should not be using this treestumping shot tonight. Saving it for later, once we've got fewer targets is probably a better idea.

What changed from this quote to your most recent one about him using it whenever he'd like blah blah blah?

I did in fact change my mind, based on the provability argument. As I said earlier this post, if someone gets stumped, I think Lyman is likely to be town, pending other kills that occur. Having someone proven town is useful.

Another reason I suspect you is because of your suspect list. This is the least suspicious due to there being more town than scum but...

I don't understand. You don't like my suspicions list, but you don't say why. Also, since you're on it, there is a measure of OMGUS. I'm not really sure what you mean by "least suspicious" here.

My apologies for missing these. My answers in bold.

For those who have yet to answer, please do so in your next post. I don't know why you're avoiding it. I'll post it again here:

-Do you think JL really has the power he claimed?

Probably, as it is basically provable.

-If JL really has this power, do you think it's a scum PR or town PR?

As stated, town PR, with a very small probability of being the actual scum kill method.

-If it's a town PR, do you want him to use it N1?

At Lyman's discretion, with complete report immediately beginning the following day.

-If yes, do you think we should collectively discuss who he should use it on, a list of a few people he should use it on one of, or just let him choose on his own?

In a perfect world, himself. In a slightly less perfect world, someone on my suspicions list. In this game, someone with healthy suspicion on him/her. But it's Lyman's choice, and he's the one who has to defend it.

Add this one too.
-In your opinion, what are the odds we wake tomorrow with a successful stump? Explain your reasoning.

Odds of this event don't matter today. Only thing that matters is what actually happens overnight. What is the purpose of this question?

[MacavityLock]

Chinaman, there are about 4 questions/points in my post 339 that you have not addressed.

I will be doing one more thing when I go back. If I remember correctly, yes JL was at L-1 or close to it, but there was plenty of time for him to argue his way out of it without claiming. Why resort to a claim so quickly? Then, when he claims it, it's a jumbled mess of a claim....

Lyman was at L-1 for 3 real-time days, you called for more votes on him during that time, and imag explicitly requested a claim from him (I implicitly requested a claim). How can you possibly make a case for a "quick-claim" here?

Very close to switching my vote.

[MacavityLock]

Chinaman, how many theme games have you played? How many minis? How many mini themes? I don't often see games with that many PRs.

Wagon-examination isn't as useful as it would be with some flips, but this is pretty much true for any scumhunting on Day 1. Do you not believe it's a valid scumhunting method?

Is there a reason Budja isn't on there [your suspicious list]?

It's because I don't think he's been all that suspicious. What else do you want me to say?

I would say that he target me specifically, but I don't want scum to know exactly who he's targeting tonight. All in all, I would be most afraid of him hitting someone with a PR, but I don't mind being one of the targets he has to choose from as I am without a power but still town.

Why would you offer yourself up to a vig, either as town or scum? You dying hurts your win condition no matter what, so I'm not sure I understand your motive behind this, except maybe in terms of other people's reads.

I'm on the fence about asking others like me to step up and put their names in the hat so that he can prove himself if he is indeed town. I say this because if there were 4 of us who threw our names in the hat, that narrows the field down for scum on which town have PR's. What are your thoughts?

Yeah, this is a bad idea.

[MacavityLock]

SB, what's wrong with the claim?

[MacavityLock]

-I explained why I would offer myself up in the part you quoted man. It's not that hard to understand. Plus, I wouldn't be dead if I was stumped would I? Something not right about this part. Please explain how you missed my explanation in the part you quoted AND why you are calling JL's claimed role a vig all a sudden when it's not.... Also, tell me how turning into a stump hurts my win condition if I am without a power and can still talk.

Pay close attention now.

My name is Richard Curtis, and my 'special ability' stems from my recent work not being the same standard as my earlier work, my recent movie The Boat That Rocked was so devoid of life that I now have the power to suck the life out of one player of my choosing.

Said player can then still post, but has no life; therefore, is dead.

No, the player I would choose would be dead for all game purposes, it says, except still being able to talk in the thread.

It's a VIG, for fuck sake. Now, you still offering to get stumped?

[MacavityLock]

yeah. town win condition, win when all threats to the town have been eliminated. I don't need life to win.

Dead for all game purposes almost certainly includes win condition. Getting stumped is a way to be eliminated. What don't you understand about this?

[MacavityLock]

@mod

, mass-prods and/or another deadline extension please?

[MacavityLock]

Why wouldn't you want to let him claim, if he so desires?

[MacavityLock]

So, I might as well talk out loud here. If budja is scum, then his scum partner is likely on the wagon. If not, then he has a lurker buddy. If Budja is town, it is likely that

both scum

are on the wagon. Although all the scum might not be on this wagon, but that seems improbable, because I would imagine he would be lynched already if that were the case.

I'm wondering why BC thinks that there's 2 scum.

[MacavityLock]

China, what does the following mean?

I don't believe his claim at being town and being purely without anything useful.

Also, I too would like answers to the below.

1. Are you and your partner confirmed town to each other? (v. important to know now)
2 Why claim?

[MacavityLock]

Chinaman, please answer my questions below.

China, what does the following mean?

I don't believe his claim at being town and being purely without anything useful.

Also, I too would like answers to the below.

1. Are you and your partner confirmed town to each other? (v. important to know now)
2 Why claim?

I think you gave an answer to "Why claim?", but the others remain unanswered. The important point: Does your role PM say that your partner is definitely 100% town?

[MacavityLock]

p430 answers everything in your post.

Sorry I missed some of it, but it is kind of buried in there. However, I'm still not sure what you mean by

I don't believe his claim at being town and being purely without anything useful.

If I'm interpreting your 430 correctly, you're saying that you don't believe that Budja could possibly be vanilla with no perks. Is this correct, or no? If not, can you please, in a small concise post, explain what you were trying to say here?

I'm not opposed to a BC wagon at this time, mostly due to the way his votes have fallen.

@mod,

prods for Locke Lamora and danakillsu?

[MacavityLock]

China, in your massive blather you have still failed to answer my questions.

However, I'm still not sure what you mean by

I don't believe his claim at being town and being purely without anything useful.

If I'm interpreting your 430 correctly, you're saying that you don't believe that Budja could possibly be vanilla with no perks. Is this correct, or no? If not, can you please, in a small concise post, explain what you were trying to say here?

I want a yes or no answer to the above, and if your answer is no, I want a

short

explanation. Like under 4 sentences.

I'm not opposed to a BC wagon at this time, mostly due to the way his votes have fallen.

@Macavity, then why no vote. Its all very nice of you not to think I'm scum and all but it would really be nice to have a bit of counter-wagonning rather than cruise to a deadline lynch.

Because I wanted to see if you would join my Snow_Bunny wagon without prompting. Now I will prompt. You want to join the Snow_Bunny wagon instead?

We haven't heard from Lyman in a while, by the way. Would he like to weigh in?

And once again, I fail to read the mod's post except for the vote count. My apologies, ort.

[MacavityLock]

My apologies, I've been sick over the past week.

Mac: No, nothing is impossible. Due to my experience and thinking, odds are (in my mind) that we have very few VT's and I have a gut read that his claim was false. Short enough?

Yes. I think the answer is crap, but I can at least parse it now.

My claim makes me so easily provable as town it's ridiculous for you to want my lynch.
My claim makes absolutely zero sense to be coming from scum as it's so easily disprovable.

How is your claim easily provable, without you or your partner dying and flipping mason? How is it disprovable without naming your partner?

I do think that given the claim, you're probably a bad lynch for today, so I won't be switching my vote to you, even though I still find you scummy. I agree that the stumping-sacrifice offer makes more sense given a mason.

I'm kind of worried about DS, given active lurking.

I'll raise my hand for a BC lynch if I can't convince the rest of you that Budja is scum.

When have you tried to convince the rest of us about anything? Your case on Budja consists of literally just

Reasons: Opportunistic, few posts of substance, possible odd relationship w/ Macavity

Is that supposed to sway people who weren't already on the Budja-wagon?

I think I still prefer a Snow_bunny lynch, but I would prefer a BC lynch to a Budja lynch, so I will also respond in the affirmative to imag's straw poll.

[MacavityLock]

When have you tried to convince the rest of us about anything? Your case on Budja consists of literally just

Reasons: Opportunistic, few posts of substance, possible odd relationship w/ Macavity

Is that supposed to sway people who weren't already on the Budja-wagon?

I have written more on Budja than just that, you either haven't read all of my posts or you are intentionally misrepresenting them. It is also hardly surprising to see you defending him.

True, I missed your iso post 17, which points out a quote from Budja, and calls it opportunistic. You also say that he was opportunistic in your intro post. This is just you saying the same thing 3 different times. Did I miss anything else?

I am serious about the question of whether or not you seriously think you've made a case that will swing people.

[MacavityLock]

My point here is not that you're attacking Budja. It's that you're actively lurking and that

I'll raise my hand for a BC lynch

if I can't convince the rest of you

that Budja is scum.

is disingenuous.

This is especially true now given

I normally don't build cases,

I point out scumminess and mistakes and let others weigh in on them

.

If you were attacking anyone else in the same way, I'd be pointing it out.

[MacavityLock]

It's not a semantic difference, it's a contradiction in your posts about the way you're approaching this game. Again, my point would hold if you were attacking anybody, not just Budja.

If you couldn't tell by now, Budja is somewhere in my top 3 most townie right now. Ever have a game where you happen to agree with someone, even if that person isn't popular with other players? If you want to attack him, go right ahead. If you can find something scummy about him other than his opportunism (which I happen to disagree with), maybe you

can

convince me. But you haven't been able to, and you haven't been trying. And I can attack you right back if I think you're contradicting yourself in those attacks.

[MacavityLock]

Unvote. Vote: BC.

[MacavityLock]

Unvote. Vote: BC.

Mac, I really don't get it. What about me is scummy to you? Also, i'm down for a budja lynch, or a Net lynch.

Right now, I find your vote pattern to be scummy.

You should know that you are not my top choice for a lynch. You are my top choice for a lynch of the players that could feasibly be lynched today.

[MacavityLock]

what about my voting patterns are scummy? I would love for you to back that up with some evidence.

Given what we know now about Lyman's claim, I don't like that you brought him to L-1. I don't like that you re-voted Lyman for his second wagon. I don't like that you easy-wagoned Budja with your second vote on him. I don't understand your Neto vote.

So, i'm not your top choice for a lynch, but I am your top choice for a lynch that is feasible today. yea, way to contradict yourself.

We're 2 days from deadline. It is in no way contradictory.

[MacavityLock]

Upon a closer read of 545, I now do understand your Neto vote. Other points still stand.

Besides, you called it a vig, it's not really a vig.

How is it not a vig?

[MacavityLock]

Let me be perfectly clear here. There are other players that I think would be better lynches than you today. My normal procedure is to go after the player I find to have the most (or "highest quality") scumtells. However, given that we're 2 days from deadline, and there is no lynch without a voting majority, I am now required to work backwards from the set of players that would be feasible to lynch. As far as I can tell, that list includes just you and Budja. So, between the two of you, I am looking at your actions as if you were scum, and asking whether or not that would be consistent. In my opinion, you come out as more likely.

Unlike Netop, i didn't make assumptions and presume information about Lymans role. And I don't know why you think that I know more about than anyone else. What's wrong with bringing a player to L-1? What's wrong with revoting him? If i thought him suspicious or scummy, what's wrong with voting him again? You guys keep saying easy wagoning of Budja, how is he an easy wagon? I would like to know.

I think that given his claim, there's a good chance that Lyman is town, and provably so. If you are scum, you would happily have brought a townie to L-1 in your intro post. You also would have latched on to his second wagon in an effort to take out a power role. Budja had gotten all sorts of suspicion on him, and was thus a soft target by the time you had place your 2nd vote on him.

Again, this is not my normal procedure. I can absolutely see how your actions could come from a townie. But given my options, that's just the way it has to go.

So, i'm not your top choice for a lynch, but I am your top choice for a lynch that is feasible today. yea, way to contradict yourself.

We're 2 days from deadline. It is in no way contradictory.

I disagree, you say one thing, and then say the other.

They're two very distinct things. What's the contradiction?

How is it not a vig?

Because the victim stays alive and is allowed to talk.

Where do you get "stays alive" from? Let me once again remind you of his claim.

No, the player I would choose would be

dead for all game purposes

, it says, except still being able to talk in the thread.

How is it not a vig?

[MacavityLock]

How is it not a vig?

Because the victim stays alive and is allowed to talk.

Where do you get "stays alive" from? Let me once again remind you of his claim.

No, the player I would choose would be dead for all game purposes

, it says, except still being able to talk in the thread

.

How is it not a vig?

Congratulations, you found where "is allowed to talk" comes from. Now, how about "stays alive"?

[MacavityLock]

Nope, not given how treestumps work.

[MacavityLock]

(This is hypothetical, just for you Net.) If I were scum, why would I care if he targets me with his action? My scum team would still have the most important ability, the night kill. I would still be alive in game, the town would likely not lynch me right away because they would probably hunt for more scum. The scum team would still have three players alive. only the two would have their possible night abilities still.

If a scum got stumped, the town would

not ever need to lynch them

. That scum would already be dead for all game purposes. The fact that the scum could still talk is immaterial.

[MacavityLock]

BC, what does "dead for all game purposes" mean to you?

[MacavityLock]

Unvote. Vote: BC.

Mac, I really don't get it. What about me is scummy to you? Also, i'm down for a budja lynch, or a Net lynch.

Right now, I find your vote pattern to be scummy.

You should know that you are not my top choice for a lynch. You are my top choice for a lynch of the players that could feasibly be lynched today.

^^^Scummiest post of the game

2 DAYS TO DEADLINE! Why is this a problem?

[MacavityLock]

If Mac really wanted to vote for the person who could most "feasibly be lynched today", he would have voted Budja. Easy. Mac's p543 is a blatant lie.

Seriously, if you're going to put what I said in quotes, and then put other words around it, it'll be pretty obvious where you're changing my meaning entirely. I very much did not say I wanted to vote for the person whom it was "most feasible to lynch". I said that I needed to choose from the set of players who were feasible to lynch, and from the way I was reading the game, that set was/is Budja and BC.

If for some reason my vote is needed to hammer Budja, and a BC lynch becomes infeasible, I will vote Budja.

Re: Lyman's stumping as potential SK method, yeah, I already brought this up as a possibility.

[MacavityLock]

hey mac, do you think it's odd that imag decided to post in your defense before you? I sure as hell do. In fact, I think it's even more suspicious given your voting patterns and the fact that we are really close to deadline. I will tell you what I think about it after you tell me how you feel about it.

Do I think it's strange? Yeah, I do, actually. Do I think it's a big obvious neon "SCUM" sign? No, I don't. It is not something I'm interested in pursuing today, as we have less than 2 days remaining to deadline. But, yes, it is something worth noting.

I honestly think this pegs you as pretty obv scum at this point imag. You are either hardcore buddying up to a town mac or you are covering for your scum buddy in case he didn't get around to posting before lynch.

I thought you were going to wait for me to answer before giving your commentary. Weird.

Mac, please also explain to me how you can call Budja the easy lynch choice (ie, i read you saying that as Budja has played scummy as hell and is an easy target because people often like to lynch scummy play......correct me if I'm wrong) yet when it comes down to the 2 choices of feasible lynches, you think BC is the more scummy due to....uh....voting patterns? Let me say that I do realize that is part of my suspicion of you and imag, but I'm lynching the most scummy of the 3 of you first...which is Budja.... On that same note though, how can you justify your vote of BC yet ignore my thoughts surrounding you, budja, and imag's voting patterns?

Well before BC's second vote on Budja, there had been a Big Wagon (TM) on Budja. (I know it got up to L-2, not sure if it got to L-1.) Putting a vote back on someone like Budja once Big Wagon-Vanilla Claim has occurred will probably not raise all that much suspicion. Therefore, easy vote. No, I don't think Budja has "played scummy as hell", and I have said as much multiple times before.

I'm not ignoring your thoughts on the voting patterns of me, Budja, and imag. You're right, none of us have voted for either of the others. I'm going to make a guess here, imag and Budja, correct me if I'm wrong: None of us are particularly high on any of the others' scumlists. How does this make any of us more likely to be scum?

[MacavityLock]

I will ask you (Mac and Imag) this though. In Budja's most recent posts, why do you think these would be coming from a townie over coming from scum? Everything he writes screams scum to me...how am I (and apparently 4 others) so very wrong and it is you 2 who are right?

Now you're just directly asking us to defend him. Isn't defending people scummy?

Why are his posts more likely to be coming from scum? I seriously haven't seen any convincing arguments yet.

Btw, I'm not proved town yet and you all think my attacks are full of holes yet none of you are saying I'm scum and just lying about being a Mason. Not saying that this is a tell for you all, but I will say it shows me that some (if not all) of you already know I'm town (cuz...you know...you're scum). It's a very small footnote in a growing list, but it's there for me at least. (I know, I attack Net for trying to lynch me and out my partner before it's time and I attack you all for not mentioning it as a possibility....life just so isn't fair!)

Given the mason claim, you're not the person to test today. You still haven't answered my questios about how you're provably or disprovably anything.

[MacavityLock]

dana's nonexistent. If Neto shows up and votes for BC, the BC wagon needs DeathSauce and one other to be complete.

[MacavityLock]

I believe that's the hammer? If not, let me know and I will vote Budja as well.

[MacavityLock]

For f' sakes, why didn't you guys lynch DeathSauce like 8 different times? Also, why I get NKed?