Mafia 103 - Ktown Mafia (Game Over)

[Kirbyoshi]

votes come first. cases come after.

Stop being so chamber-esque.

Furry, Kunk, Cruelty, and myself have expressed that we don't like your "Mexican" way of doing things. If you want to withhold your cases, that's fine, but don't expect to stay alive long.

[Furry]

OK... im getting ready to make a move here

Scum team is kunk and DJ to start. Ive fully convinced myself of that much. The push on cruel backs it up. The fact that kunk seems to be waiting for me to decide if im going for DJ or him backs it up. All I really dont know right now is if MME or SC is going to be picking up the last spot.

Im expecting the vote to hinge on whatever of them are town too since cruel should follow me and kirby is already here.

Vote kunk

Im ready to start moving to it. Im going to RB one of DJ/SC/MME tonight. Cruel should track one of them too.

[Kdub]

Vote Count

Furry (0)

-

cruelty (1)

- don_johnson

Sir Chris (0)

-

kunkstar7 (2)

- Kirbyoshi, Furry

don_johnson (0)

-

Kirbyoshi (0)

-

My Milked Eek (0)

-

No Lynch (0)

-

Not Voting (4)

- cruelty, Sir Chris, kunkstar7, My Milked Eek

7 players alive, 4 votes needed to lynch.

Deadline is February 26, ~1:30 pm MST

[cruelty]

I don't really understand why my claim is hard to believe.


I'm actually a little concerned Furry is a mafia roleblocker. I need to think about this a bit, not gonna blindly follow yet.


Also dj I'm not gonna bother playing stupid games with you. Lay out your case.

[Furry]

I'm actually a little concerned Furry is a mafia roleblocker. I need to think about this a bit, not gonna blindly follow yet.

Anything you want me to respond to in particular? I think defending how ive played my role is just going to result in WIFOM

[don_johnson]

Furry, Kunk, Cruelty, and myself have expressed that we don't like your "Mexican" way of doing things. If you want to withhold your cases, that's fine, but don't expect to stay alive long.

you got something against mexicans? the idea behind the plan is to avoid a quick lynch and force everyone to participate. noone has explained

why

they think this is abad idea.

cruelty fit the bill for suspects when i entered the game. he was on both original townie wagons. he was voting me with no reasoning when i replaced in. he then switched to SC, whom he claims to have had 66% clear. then, he thinks someone is claiming his role and instead of pushing for mass claim he votes no lynch. then his results semi clear a couple vanillas and the other claimed power role who seems to be blindly trusting him without any in thread reasoning other than "i have a town read on him."

i think both our power roles are gambiting scum at this point.

[Kdub]

Sir Chris and My Milked Eek have been prodded.

[don_johnson]

unvote, vote: furry

you, sir, are in violation of rule # 4:

4) any player who places a second vote on a player who already has one vote should be autolynched.

not only that. you are summarily ignoring my requests for more explanation of your "town" read on cruelty. in fact, you don't even seem to be accepting the possibility that he is gambiting scum.

kunk was the suboptimal vote. if you were town you could have voted me(as you have us both marked as scum), but instead you chose the player who already has a vote on them thus bringing us closer to lynch in lylo. meanwhile, we have two prods going out. what's the rush? both you and kirby have failed to explain why you have an issue with the mexican standoff. are you afraid of having to explain yourself?

[Sir Chris]

Hm, Furry did break a rule huh?

Meh, this is troublesome. I metagamed that town didn't have a lot of power, but ergh.

[Kirbyoshi]

are you afraid of having to explain yourself?

I think you, sir, are the one who is afraid to explain himself. You're pretty much forcing everyone to place a vote before you explain your cases. Withholding of scumtells, especially at lylo, only helps scum.

In fact, I will add another rule:

8) Anyone who pushes for this strategy when more than half the game is against it should be autolynched.

[don_johnson]

I think you, sir, are the one who is afraid to explain himself. You're pretty much forcing everyone to place a vote before you explain your cases.

Withholding of scumtells, especially at lylo, only helps scum

.

first: try and come up with your own style.

second: i have explained my cases. both of them upon request. they were to be detailed at the end of the standoff. by not being allowed to vote for a player who has been voted, it forces everyone to "build" their own case. hence, no piggybacking allowed.

in regards to the bolded: who is "witholding scumtells" and how does it only help scum?

please answer: how does the mexican standoff help scum? give me a reason. all you and furry are doing is saying you don't "like" the idea. you have not come up with one scenario where it actually hurts town. don't you see the benefit in forcing

every single player

to contribute to scumhunting in what is most likely a lylo situation?

half the game has not come out against the strategy. i am not "pushing" the strategy. i will abandon it as soon as a rational reason to abandon it is presented.

for the record:

Scummiest out of the three imo.

this was your reasoning at the time of your vote. pretty weak sauce to be getting your panties in a bunch over my "lack of" explanation when this is all you had to say with your vote. seeing as how furry broke the rules, the standoff is effectively over, so feel free to explain your case.

[My Milked Eek]

Picking up prod. I've been having some pc problems and was only (or most of the time) able to connect via school pc's. Catching up in class isn't easily done

I'll have something substantial by tomorrow.

[Kirbyoshi]

first: try and come up with your own style.

Wait, so who's style am I stealing?

second: i have explained my cases. both of them upon request. they were to be detailed at the end of the standoff.

Really? I looked back, and when asked to clarify why you were voting for cruelty, you gave some elusive answer about kitchen decor, and said something along the lines of "I'll explain more later." Everyone should explain their votes either before, in the same post as, or soon after the vote itself. There should be no "I'll explain in a week, just go with my plan, lawlz."

in regards to the bolded: who is "witholding scumtells" and how does it only help scum?

Um, you are withholding scumtells by not giving your full case on cruelty. It helps only scum because scum can basically vote for whomever they want to, and if we do the "standoff" thing, town cannot say anything against their vote, since they haven't heard the case yet.

half the game has not come out against the strategy.

You're right, more than half has. 7 players alive. Kirb+Furry+cruelty+kunk=4 players. 4/7>1/2. Lern2mathscum.

[don_johnson]

kunk wasn't against the plan. lern2read.

Um, you are withholding scumtells by not giving your full case on cruelty. It helps only scum because scum can basically vote for whomever they want to, and if we do the "standoff" thing, town cannot say anything against their vote, since they haven't heard the case yet.

no. i laid out the "scumtells". even if i hadn't, you'd get them once the voting is over. town isn't supposed to say anything about the votes. not sure if you completely understand the process of mexican standoff.

everyone votes.

then everyone explains.

a 36 hour time limit makes it so that each player would have to participate and we wouldn't be left without reasons.

you are worried that with my plan "scumcould just vote whoever they want to". who do you suggest scum vote for then, if not for "who they want to"? don't you think there might be some benefit by getting scum to vote and then forcing them to offer reasons for their vote? it would give us material to analyze. are you against information?

your rebuttal is borderline retarded. when you have something useful to say, lay it out there. otherwise, go ahead and EXPLAIN

YOUR

VOTE. you see, you completely ignored the section of my post which asked for

your

reasoning.

as for me not explaining: post 1232 details the vote on furry. post 1230 details the vote on cruelty. are you just ignoring my posts and hoping noone notices your asscrack arguments? or are you just chainsawing for your buddy?

[Furry]

you are summarily ignoring my requests for more explanation of your "town" read on cruelty. in fact, you don't even seem to be accepting the possibility that he is gambiting scum.

I dont think he is gambiting scum. I dont need to explain a town read. Burden of proof is on you. Its YOUR job to prove him scum, not MY job to prove him town.

kunk was the suboptimal vote. if you were town you could have voted me(as you have us both marked as scum), but instead you chose the player who already has a vote on them thus bringing us closer to lynch in lylo. meanwhile, we have two prods going out. what's the rush? both you and kirby have failed to explain why you have an issue with the mexican standoff. are you afraid of having to explain yourself?

You are both scum. If cruel gets in here and says he wants you lynched im going to move my vote. Putting kunk at L-2 though has a better chance at driving out third scum then putting a first vote on you.

Here is why what you are proposing is really bad

-It allows people to put out suspicions in a way that can be manipulated. Any order of claiming or voting allows scum to make a much more optimal move, and in a lylo situation this is dangerous. The order is a reason you normally see a 'popcorn' method in claiming instead of 'whoever posts next claims'. If we had a "everyone is voting X or Y already" then its a more feaseable strategy if the order is predetermined in order so the swing vote (concensus town read) votes last. There is way to much that can go wrong with forcing votes though, so we arent going to do it.

So also now im a scum RB who has only been targeting scum reads and targeting claimed VT players?

Where is MME too. I would love to hear him and SC post between who out of me/cruel/kunk is scum. Im still sticking to a DJ/kunk/?? team where ?? is down to one of the two.

Heads up though that I doubt I will have much if any access untill late sunday/midday monday

[don_johnson]

I dont think he is gambiting scum. I dont need to explain a town read. Burden of proof is on you. Its YOUR job to prove him scum, not MY job to prove him town.

okay. one more time for the slow kid. "cruelty voted my slot day3 without a case, then moved to SC even though he had SC 66% clear. then, when he thought someone was claiming his role he voted no lynch as opposed to mass claim." no town motivation for either of those moves.

You are both scum. If cruel gets in here and says he wants you lynched im going to move my vote. Putting kunk at L-2 though has a better chance at driving out third scum then putting a first vote on you.

a. i am not scum. b. how does this "drive out third scum"?

Here is why what you are proposing is really bad

-It allows people to put out suspicions in a way that can be manipulated. Any order of claiming or voting allows scum to make a much more optimal move, and in a lylo situation this is dangerous. The order is a reason you normally see a 'popcorn' method in claiming instead of 'whoever posts next claims'.

if you'd read the rules properly you would realize that it was a "popcorn" style. not who posts next. whoever gets voted has to vote next.

If we had a "everyone is voting X or Y already" then its a more feaseable strategy if the order is predetermined in order so the swing vote (concensus town read) votes last. There is way to much that can go wrong with forcing votes though, so we arent going to do it.

again. you fail to produce a scenario where anything "goes wrong". if everyone votes someone else and noone has more than one vote, how can anything "go wrong"?

So also now im a scum RB who has only been targeting scum reads and targeting claimed VT players?

tbh, your claim and targets make way more sense to me than cruelty's. probably part of why i was leaning scum on him in the first place. i don't like you pairing me with kunk and i certainly can't grasp why you would be against such a clever gambit like the mexican standoff.

unvote, vote cruelty

i don't like the fact that players are lurking today. has anyone made an actual case on kunkstar? if so, can we get a post reference or something. i'm going to iso kirby in the meantime.

[cruelty]

sorry for the inactivity, been very busy. will step up the activity over the next day or two, for now i need my sleep.

[Sir Chris]

hm, going off my gut I suppose it'd be cruelty/yoshi/kunk atm, unsure how solid that is though.

[Kirbyoshi]

My gut right now says it's kunk/dj/SC. Chris is not 100% clear yet. The fact that he didn't visit anyone means that he did not SUBMIT the NK for the Night. He still COULD be scum, it's just a little less likely. And actually, to be fair, the same goes for me.

[kunkstar7]

Ok reread Cruelty somewhat.

My main focus was on dj's mention of him switching to Sir Chris, in regards to this quote:

most likely scenario is 3 scum. in 3 scum you are most likely guaranteed at least one power role. power roles generally can't take action and kill in the same night. which means scum team members have a 66% chance of moving at night. given the fact that cruelty claims to have gotten no movement on SC night 2, why so willing to lynch him on day 3? just seems like it goes against the odds.

This supposedly occurs on Post 918 and 948. Yet neither post contains a vote, only a single unvote (off of dj? Unsure.)

The quote by don_johnson made logical sense to me as it is in theory correct. Yet if you review Cruelty's interactions on Day 3, his main focus was on getting Heilo lynched, and only Post 918 and 948 focused on Sir Chris.

I found that both of these posts were simply just reviewing Sir Chris and looking for inconsistency in his play, anything that stood out. Cruelty specifically stated that he was not gunning for a Sir Chris lynch, and also did not at any point in these posts vote Sir Chris. He stated he was looking for connections between myself and Sir Chris, trying to get a clear read. This effectively negates that entire section of don_johnson's position against cruelty.

As such, I find cruelty's claim a bit more believable, and I'm not ready to support a cruelty lynch unless more evidence comes up. I would also like some comment from MME.


Don_johnson, while rereading Day 3 I remembered you were strongly supporting the position that Sir Chris was scum.

Why no pressing against Sir Chris today? Do you still hold anything against him?
I know we have been focusing on the claims today, but I would like to see if your opinion still holds, and if so, why are you not pressing him?

[cruelty]

Ok I'm not really feeling a dj lynch, I think I'll vote either kunk or chris, but before I do I'm going to go back to my post 948 and do some re-reads.


In fact, I'm going to withhold my vote until there's some contribution from MME (who incidentally hasn't come through with the promised 'substantial content'). I can't in good conscience let a lynch go through in lylo with no contribution from one slot.

[Sir Chris]

I'd like to know what basis you'd ever vote for me on.

[Kdub]

My Milked Eek has been prodded.

[cruelty]

chris - If kunk is scum then I'm pretty sure you are. I can't see me voting for you first based on that, though.

[Furry]

Along with this, Mike's and Heilo's votes were the worst of the bunch on Kirby. (Yes I do realize I'm there in third, at least in my view. ) Since there won't be anything on CK today, I'll go with a Heilo lynch, not going to vote yet though.

This is one of the things that is making me think that kunk is scum and kirby is town. Right here it almost looks like he is already trying to set people up for after kirby is dead and flips scum. He is on the kirby wagon, yet he is throwing dirt and mike (MME) and helio (town) for voting him. I am not sure what this does to MME, but he is taking a shot at town for being on the same wagon he is.

Besides revealing Heilo's alignment, do any of you feel that this lynch will provide any information besides that, such as other player's alignments or such?

Searching for others to set things up for him

Without MME's claim, we are looking at 4 vanilla and 2 PR. I don't know, the way cruelty's results supported Furry's results looks fishy to me. Just vibes basically, as scum trying to make themselves look confirmed by helping confirm another role.

Another option I considered was both PR's lying and supporting each other. Yet the vice to this would be would the game be balanced with just a vig and a doc?

Opening today with "cruel looks like he is tailing furrys results" and "both might be scum". Immediately justifying the lynch of what appears to be a weaker claim, AND a lynch of a second claim incase people decide to back my lynch instead.

I understand waiting for MME to check in, but there is no reason not to lay down the reasoning to lynch kunk while we wait.