Newbie 920: Mafia in Newbietown (Game over! Town wins!)

[McGriddle]

I haven't really done anything in this game

that is considerably scummy. Please show me and I will try to defend myself. The fact that I am such a terrible scum should be enough to prove my innocence at this point so the fact that I haven't done anything that stupid is reason enough to NOT vote me anymore.

The bolded portion is my problem with you in this game, McGriddle.

That is out of context. What is there to do in this game other than state my case and hope everyone pays attention?

[Zachrulez]

18th vote count of day 1:

Carl Sagan - 2 (Mcgriddle, Unsight)
Mcgriddle - 2 (Ythan, Netopalis)
Ythan - 1 (mariomaster777)
Netopalis - 1 (Carl Sagan)
Julano - 1 (Fiyr)

Not voting (FluffyGiggles, Julano)

With 9 alive it's 5 to lynch.

If I made any mistakes, let me know asap.

DL is March 16 at 9am central.

[Netopalis]

You haven't stated your case convincingly or strongly. Your case against Sagan is pretty much based on playstyle and your case against Ythan is essentially OMGUS.

[Unsight]

By the way, my case is coming.

Fiyr, where did you go?

As of 2 minutes ago, it has been 48 hours since this post and we still haven't seen your case.

[Unsight]

Also we haven't seen Carl since the 4th and I'm starting to wonder if he's just camping out until the suspicion on him blows over.

[Netopalis]

Mod: Prod on Carl Sagan, please?

[Zachrulez]

Carl Sagan has been prodded.

[Ythan]

Could each player on one of the one-vote wagons explain their reasoning for their vote as it stands now?

[Fiyr]

I'm sorry, there's really no excuse for me to be gone that long.

Julano:

My case on him is that,
He has been fencesitting/having a wishywashy read and he blatantly refused to respond.
Should I rephrase my questions?

2. Logic. Well, I guess it's gut actually, but that's pretty much based on logic anyway.

Carl I thought before was town, but his follow up makes me less than convinced. Having said that, a mafia strategy of attacking the IC seems dangerous, so strategy-wise would probably be innocent.

He seems rather wishywashy here on his stance.

The quote is of an answer to one of the original questions.

No, I'm not going to respond to that.

The analysis I wanted in order to compare against my own.

I find your refusal more annoying than it is anything else. Still, your blatant refusal puts up a red flag for me.

Shall I rephrase the question? Why did you respond "yes" to a non-yes or no question?

Anyway, I don't want to get caught up in my own world here, I will post a little more on the McGriddle case + others next.

[Fiyr]

EBWODP: I'm sorry I forgot,

Julano seems to have little to say, It seems like he needs to be prodded in some way to comment/respond.

[Netopalis]

My vote is on McGriddle for a few reasons.

1) I don't yet have enough evidence to go after Sagan, and I think he'll be replaced at any rate.

2) McGriddle has failed to contribute much of substance aside from attacking Sagan and Ythan for questionable reasons.

3) Decent policy lynch

4) Excessive early buddying

5) It seems as if he's trying to hide something

[McGriddle]

My vote is on McGriddle for a few reasons.

1) I don't yet have enough evidence to go after Sagan, and I think he'll be replaced at any rate.

2) McGriddle has failed to contribute much of substance aside from attacking Sagan and Ythan for questionable reasons.

3) Decent policy lynch

4) Excessive early buddying

5) It seems as if he's trying to hide something

All of this is purely opinionated and gut feelings. None of this merits a vote on me at all. But you seem to be leaning towards Carl, then leaning away from him. This wishy-washy attitude is common amongst scum-buddies.

[Netopalis]

The reason I'm doing that is because it's obvious he's playing a character. I think he'll change his tune once replaced.

[McGriddle]

That shouldn't matter neto. If he is scummy he is scummy, being in character or not, scum is scum.

[Netopalis]

One of the most important skills in mafia, especially in newbie games, is to determine whether someone is scum or is just a bad player. I suspect it's the latter. If Sagan shows back up, though, my vote will move back to him.

[Ythan]

All of this is purely opinionated and gut feelings. None of this merits a vote on me at all. But you seem to be leaning towards Carl, then leaning away from him. This wishy-washy attitude is common amongst scum-buddies.

It's not, and it does, and this is OMGUS mudslinging.

[Unsight]

My vote is on McGriddle for a few reasons.

1) I don't yet have enough evidence to go after Sagan, and I think he'll be replaced at any rate.

2) McGriddle has failed to contribute much of substance aside from attacking Sagan and Ythan for questionable reasons.

3) Decent policy lynch

4) Excessive early buddying

5) It seems as if he's trying to hide something

I don't like this post. It's not very... Netopalis-y to me. 2 & 4 is valid. 1 & 3 are excuses and 5 is fluff. If anything you miss some of the other scum tells such as plentiful AtE's to support dodgy reasoning.

All in all, it's a bit out of character for you.

[Ythan]

"Excuses" that make the case more valid. And five falls under gut.

[Netopalis]

The problem is that, as usual on D1, we have very little information. Thus, any case will appear to be scanty. There is a stronger case on McGriddle's alignment than on Sagan's at this time, and it's better to present a weak case than no case at all.

[Unsight]

"Excuses" that make the case more valid. And five falls under gut.

No, number one would be me saying "I don't have enough evidence to vote Fiyr so I'm going to vote FluffyGiggles." It's a long, long way from valid anything.

Number three is an excuse to me. I've never done a policy lynch before so calling something one and then using it as reasoning doesn't sit well with me.

Okay, number five is either fluff or gut. Reread this quote from Netopalis' first post and let me know what you think:

My play is based strongly on solid, logical arguments as opposed to gut feelings and emotions.

[Ythan]

He did not say that lack of evidence on Carl was part of the case on Grid. It's part of the reason he voted Grid instead of Carl.

Yes post five seems to conflict with the earlier post, but I'm the one who called it gut. Still, since it looks like gut to me I would like to hear an explanation of that.

[Carl Sagan]

I'm not playing a role, other than that of a concerned member of this town. All statements to the contrary are simply indications of poor judgment.

[McGriddle]

I'm not playing a role, other than that of a concerned member of this town. All statements to the contrary are simply indications of poor judgment.

Nice active-lurk post.

[Ythan]

I'm not playing a role, other than that of a concerned member of this town. All statements to the contrary are simply indications of poor judgment.

Nice active-lurk post.

Where to begin.

[Zachrulez]

bump