Mini 944- Town Suav├® - TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANK!!!!! (over)

[muzzz]

/confirm

[muzzz]

He used three m's, not three z's.

---

Vote: McZombie

Because I'm quite fond of my brains.

[muzzz]

@Nik: At first I thought "I don't believe you". But then I thought about it a little more, and I went "Oh, wait, this does actually make sense". And then I looked at it some more, and I went "Oh, wait, this is actually pretty much useless".

In the five minutes that I've sat here staring at your post, I've already thought of two fairly standard mafia roles that would let them kill you despite your ability. And there's probably a few more I haven't thought of. And since your role is only useful if we can be sure why you died, well, you get the picture...

But all of that aside, I don't see the point in trying to lynch you today. Your claim implies that you'll probably be dead in a few days. If that doesn't happen, we can think about stringing you up then.

The the wikipage Duck linked to said that a hider dies if his target gets NKed. Can you confirm or deny if this is the case for you?

---

@Parama: time to put your money where your mouth is

[muzzz]

[...]and this early in the game giving the mafia someone to not shoot is problematic.

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind this part. Can you elaborate?

[muzzz]

@DTM: confirming town is indeed as useful as confirming scum. But claiming a town

investigation

is not quite as useful as claiming a scum investigation. It's generally easier (or at least, less controversial) to verify a claimed scum investigation than a claimed town investigation.

@Nik: the scum might also have a role that allows them to swap targets. Which would be especially annoying in this case because, unlike regular cops, you wouldn't be around to realize you got swapped.

[muzzz]

I refuse to ignore that post before you've answered Par's question.

[muzzz]

Woah, Im not trying to dodge any question btw. I just was not at my computer all the time.

That accusation was about you saying "ignore that post" after Parama called you out. It has nothing to do with how long it took for you to respond (which was actually fine, by my standards).

Also, the first post of the mini normal queue has a link to the wikipage that explains what a normal game is.

---

I find Ken's explanation just as plausible as it being a scumslip. And I don't really see any evidence to decide between the too. I'll be keeping an eye on him, but I don't feel it warrants a vote just yet.

---

1. No, it makes scum do catch up play to said investigators. Too many confirmed towns = death for scum.

Yeah, but they're not

confirmed

townies until we actually confirm Nik's claim.

2. A busdriver? Where did you get that kind of idea from? I thought this was a closed setup.

It is a closed setup. Which is exactly why a scum busdriver is just as much a possibility as, for example, a scum roleblocker.

---

Unvote, vote: Confid

I just don't like how he and Duck unvote and point at Par as soon as Nacho calls them out.

[muzzz]

As a matter of fact, I was typing my post while he posted his. So really this is a null tell, our unvotes were at almost the same time

That might've been a cross-post. But the finger-pointing at Par that followed clearly wasn't.

+ what Nacho said.

[muzzz]

@Confid: you're hardly more positive about Ken than Duck was.

But still,

Unvote, vote: Duck

Three votes is hardly anything to worry about. Especially when it's, apparently, not like you were going to be afk for a while. And now you're calling him the most suspicious, yet you're not willing to put him at two votes again?

[muzzz]

As further evidence of Duck's scumminess, I'd like to present meta from DuckTown in Mafia 94:

Vote Spolium

Bandwagon FTW!

[muzzz]

Don't post that without the context- that was a band wagon on someone who had self-voted.

That doesn't change the fact that DuckTown should be voting.

[muzzz]

@Nik: when I voted confid I figured that either both of them were scum, or my argument was flawed.

@Par: I'm voting Duck because he's, uncharacteristically, not voting. I think that not voting is

always

a problem. There's only one thing that townies absolutely

have

to do in a game of mafia, and that's vote.

@DTM: I gave you the name of the game (Mafia 94) and Duck's alignment there (town). I assumed that would be enough information for people to find the thread. But if not, you can find a linky to that game by clicking the "wiki" button beneath my posts.

While I understand if people who weren't there are unwilling to take my word for it, I stand by my meta argument. Duck seems significantly more careful with his vote than when I last saw him as town. And I intend to figure out why.

@Suave: Par's voting me, not Ken

[muzzz]

I'm still considering the possibility. The difference now is that I'm also considering the possibility that either of you could be scum on your own.

[muzzz]

I did explain my Duck vote, immediately after making it. Post #8 in my ISO. Everybody but you and Par seems to have understood me just fine. If you want to excuse me of being unclear, fine, but saying I didn't explain until later is just not true.

^^This oozes with bad vibes here.

This isn't much of an explanation, either, BTW.

And yes, I do tend to be concise in my explanations. I always do that, regardless of my alignment. You might have noticed that Simenon made a similar accusation in Mafia 94. If you want some more details about why I play the way I do you can find them there.

---

I won't support a hammer until we've at least heard from McZombie.

[muzzz]

EBWOP:

If you want to

accuse

me of being unclear, ...

[muzzz]

Sarcasm: yes, you're right. I forgot to mention that the wagon in 94 was much like this wagon. My bad. I totally should have announced that I'd be going against all tradition by bringing up meta from a situation that's, *gasp*, actually similar...

And if the difference between "bandwagon ftw" and "I don't really feel like voting for him again until we've heard more from him" is not discernable in your opinion, what is?

Just to be clear, that question isn't rhetorical.

[muzzz]

@Par: if Duck wants to explain why he's a different player now, I'll listen. But until he does that I'm assuming my meta is still valid. And for the record, I'd be voting Duck even if I didn't have that meta.

---

Unvote

Seriously, Dingo. In the early stages of the game, I feel that a decent bandwagon can pressure someone into letting a tell slip. If I were to do this, say, on page 10, I would understand your concern. But this early? Please. Think of what could be learned from this in late-game analysis.

Adel, what is up with this alt thing? Bantering back and forth about that doesn't help at all. It seems like a scum tactic to distract us.

Vote: Adel

@Locke: this doesn't sound like Duck bending under Dingo's pressure. This sounds like Duck telling Dingo to stop whining. As for context, you conveniently forgot to mention that the Spolium wagon had completely broken down by the time Duck decided to unvote.

Also, you appear to have missed this:

And if the difference between "bandwagon ftw" and "I don't really feel like voting for him again until we've heard more from him" is not discernable in your opinion, what is?

[muzzz]

@Special: who's your top suspect, and why? Also, why aren't you voting that person?

[muzzz]

*makes a distracted waving gesture in Dramonic's general direction*

---

@Ken: as a friendly tip, mentioning suspicions without specifics will usually go down badly with other players. Whether or not you point fingers doesn't really tend to matter. Usually, the best thing to do is figure out what's giving you those inklings. Once you've figured that out, you either bring it up as a point for discussion (if you're still not sure whether it's a scumtell) or proceed directly with accusing someone (if you're convinced it's a scumtell).

The key is the progression here: gut feeling -> concrete points -> discussion.

---

@Special: I'll assume you're not voting Duck right now because you don't want him lynched just yet. But then why aren't you voting Ken as an alternative?

---

Give me 3 good reasons Duck is scum based SOLELY on this game and I'll start listening.

He unvoted Ken for no good reason. He refuses to vote for no good reason. His activity dropped off the scale when he got pressured. And while I wouldn't consider it a scumtell myself, I imagine you'd be a bit peeved about him digging up meta as well.

---

muzzz: Duck said 'bandwagon ftw' at the time of his bandwagon vote in 94. His statement about not wanting to vote came well after his unvote on Kenman. Again, it's a completely different context. Duck didn't show any reluctance to vote Kenman as part of the wagon, he's showing reluctance to re-vote Kenman. He was just as happy to jump on the wagon here as he was there.

But he never said "I don't wanna vote" in 94. Not when voting, not when unvoting, not even well after unvoting. You're using my focus on his statements to ignore what those statements say about his behavior. And similarly, you're using the "happy to jump on" argument to ignore the fact that in 94 he jumped on when the wagon was (arguably) quicklynchable, whereas here he jumped off well before it became quicklynchable.

This, coupled with the complete hypocrisy of your previous post, gives me the impression that you'll go to any length to defend Duck. So I suppose congratulations are in order: you just stole Confid's place as my personal favorite for the DuckBuddy position.

[muzzz]

A Duck who wants a quick bandwagon isn't necessarily town, but a Duck who's not as free with his vote

is

scum. I'll even up you one and say that

anyone

who refuses to vote for reasons so craptastic as Duck's is scum.

[muzzz]

@Locke: no, I've never been in another game with Duck where he was scum.

But why do you care, anyway? There's bound to be some subtle difference in context that, by your logic, would require you to dismiss such meta.

[muzzz]

You did #4 as well so you're being a hypocrite if you're calling him out for using meta arguments.

I'd never call him out for that. I was trying to point out that

you

, by your own logic, should be calling him out for it.

---

muzzz: because your assumption is based on Duck not voting the same way as the one game you've played with him as town. If you could point to some scum meta, or even had fleshed out your case when you posted that quote, I'd feel better about your accusations. As it stands, it just looks to me like an easy snipe at Duck when he was already under pressure.

I was the first person to mention the scumminess of his unvote, and the second person with a serious vote on him. He was under pressure that I helped build. I had all the case I needed, even before I posted that quote. A fact which you've been conveniently ignoring so far.

[muzzz]

I'm sure Spyrex will be thrilled to hear you suggested him for the L-2 spot

---

If you brought it up as evidence of duckscum then that's calling him out for it. Using meta arguments yourself is hypocritical in that sense.

I didn't bring it up as evidence of duckscum, as I've said twice now. All I've done is remind you of your own logic. Funny how people need reminding of something like that, but whatever...

As long as you start voting Duck you can call me whatever you want afterwards.

[muzzz]

@Par: I meant "I didn't bring the fact that Duck used meta up as evidence of Duckscum."

Also, "I get one every game, and I'm right most of the time" is technically a meta argument

---

@DTM: no, I'm making Par's argument for him, not the other way around.

---

I'm going to try something I'll probably regret before we've reached the next page: explain in detail.

Duck and I both brought up a meta argument against a player that was under pressure, and we've both caught flak for it. Now I won't go into the argument of whether or not that's right, but I will point out that it's either a scumtell for both of us, or neither of us. The difference is that I have arguments against Duck that are unrelated to any of that meta.

And that's the problem I have with Par. He keeps ignoring the fact that most of his arguments against me also apply to Duck. Even when confronted with this he simply goes "muzzz is scummier" after pretending to give it some thought.

What I want from Par is simply for him to be consistent. Ideally, that would mean him dropping the "meta is scummy" argument and looking at the rest of the cases. But I've already given up hope that that'll happen, so I'm aiming for the next best thing. Which is showing him I'm right by getting him to help lynch Duck.

---

@Spy: you did realize that your slot is also in that "naughty group", right?

[muzzz]

I'm not calling you out solely for the meta argument - see post 99 for the full reasons I first voted you.
And then in 123 you post a SECOND meta attack on duckduck even after I had already called you out for it.

I'm sorry, but I've read 99 half a dozen times and all I get (aside from the meta) is that you didn't understand my reasons for voting. But I've explained those already.

As for 123, that's

not

a meta attack on Duck. Locke was the one who brought up meta to defend Duck. All I did was post the proper context for

Locke's

meta to show that it was rubbish.

Please point out examples of where I'm being inconsistent or you're just misrepping.
Also, that last sentence is bursting with scummy motives. That's just a silly thing to say as town, and you should realize why.

I've already pointed out why you're inconsistent: you're ignoring my arguments against Duck in favor of arguments that apply to both of us. You do so in that very post 99 you mentioned.

And I don't think what I said is silly as town. I'm trying to get my favorite scumbag lynched and prevent you from going after a townie (read: me). Those sound like good things to me. Not so good that they make me obvtown, of course, but definitely not silly either.

---

@Dramonic: actually, it says a lot coming from him. Because he's in the scummiest slot around, yet he just made a very good case for lynching you first.

[muzzz]

@Dramonic: my definition of a case is "any set of statements that makes me want to lynch someone".

All you've done so far is respond to attacks. Which doesn't really help anyone but yourself. And that's about as anti-town as it gets, I think. I'm having trouble thinking of a reason

not

to lynch you, at the moment.

---

@DTM: as a minor nitpick, I expect people to draw their own conclusions, which needn't be the same as mine. But other than that, you're right, I do expect people to think a little about what I say.

And I think I get your point. From my point of view, most of what I said after the vote was just multiple rephrasings of the same old arguments. But from your point of view, you'd have to consider the possibility that I was making that stuff up after the fact. Still, while you might think that my playstyle doesn't work well, experience tells me that the alternative is worse. So I'm not going to change just yet.

I don't usually admit this about people voting for me, but I actually like what I'm seeing from you. Your last couple of posts gave me the impression that you're making quite some effort to understand the reasoning behind what I've said. And you're actually looking for new scumtells, instead of simply droning on about the meta.

---

I'm a bit ambivalent about the current situation. On one hand there's the fact that people with anti-town attitudes should be lynched sooner rather than later. On the other hand, there's the fact that Spy will be significantly harder to lynch if he survives today.

If it comes to choosing between the two, lynching Dramonic seems like a slightly more prudent option. But for now, I'm going to hope very hard that Dramonic will see the light, and change his ways.

[muzzz]

@Spy: your wagon would need to be restarted, and the arguments against Duck will sound less relevant tomorrow. From a purely logical point of view that shouldn't be a problem. But, unfortunately, very few people are purely logical.

@DTM: "anti-town people" == Dramonic. I brought up the stuff about Spy to explain why I thought it was a decision that should not be taken too lightly.

---

I want some of what Special was on when he wrote his list. Wall-o'-texts are bad, except the two people who he labeled as wall-o'-text-posters are good, except he's always wrong about wall-o'-texts? And all of that in a wall-o'-text. Compared to this, Par looks as consistent as math.

Then there's the Nik/Par issue everybody's already mentioned, and (one of my personal favorites) the fact that he's

still

not putting his weight on a wagon. Even if he generally believes that "no vote hopping" stuff, he really ought to be at least

pushing

for his favorite lynch.

It's still early in the day, yet.

Someone will slip up, sooner or later. (Hopefully sooner.)

Emphasis mine. Really? We've been at this for over a week and a half, and we've had a decent amount of fingerpointing and wagoning. I'd say we're well into the day by now.

---

I'd probably feel good about lynching Special. He's got a lot of scumminess, obviously. But also enough anti-towniness to make him seem like a good compromise in my personal anti-town vs. scum dilemma.

I think L-2 is a good place for him, until Farside has had a chance to contribute.

[muzzz]

Missed this:

Unvote
Vote: Nobody Special

This wagon smells good.

l-2, thread carefully.

Still not a hint of original thought, or initiative. Smells like opportunistic scum, to me.

[muzzz]

@Farside: it was a good case because it made me want to lynch Dramonic.

What do you think would be Locke's chances of being scum, if we assumed for a second that DuckSpy is town?

---

Muzzz is scum and duck isn't? I mean, I've already posted the case like 5 times now.

No you haven't. What you did like 5 times now is refer us to your original voting post.

[muzzz]

@Farside: Spy called Dramonic anti-town lurkerscum (if you'll permit the paraphrasing), and then I looked at Dramonic's post and decided that Spy was right and Dramonic could do with a lynching. It's really that simple. If this doesn't answer your question, then I'm not getting the question.

Now can you please tell us what possessed you to vote Locke when half your arguments against him seem to be based on the assumption that Spy is scum?

[muzzz]

EBWOP:
... Dramonic's post

s

...

---

I guess nobody's going to take up my muzzz suspicions... *sigh* Nobody ever listens to me. Even when I'm right. I don't think I have ever gotten a wagon started that went through to a lynch

In this case, it's probably because you keep saying "I've already explained that". That's never going to convince someone who didn't agree with you in the first place.

[muzzz]

@Farside: you seem to have missed this:

Now can you please tell us what possessed you to vote Locke when half your arguments against him seem to be based on the assumption that Spy is scum?

[muzzz]

A lot of the LL case is based on the LL/Spy link (remember Spy replaced duck duck which I already commented on)

My point is that that link is more of a reason to lynch Spy than it is a reason to lynch Locke. Misguided townies occasionally end up defending scum, but I think I've yet to see the scumbag that's stupid enough to put up a chainsaw-defense for a townie.

[muzzz]

If I didn't have those scummy vibes from you I might agree but LL gives information in my view and has contributed nothing to the game that wasn't said by others. (Again you miss this point)
information = good
lynching a player that isn't offering anything = good

I'm not missing anything. My last post wasn't about which of Locke/Spy is the better lynch in general, but about whether the Locke/Spy connection is a valid argument to lynch Locke first.

I have actually considered your points. And while those arguments are valid, they lead me to different people. If you want info, lynch me or Spy. That way you can also connect Par. And if you want to lynch a non-contributor you could line up half the town, with Dramonic being a mile ahead of everyone else.

In short, I agree that Locke is probably scum. I just think there are far better lynches to be had today.

[muzzz]

I'm starting to get bored with this day. I still think Spy is the best lynch today, but at this point I'm perfectly willing to settle for a little less.

Unvote, vote: Nobody Special

He's just stalling, anyway. Last time we saw him he promised to answer Farside's question. Instead, he went on a 4-day leave. And now, apparently, he has no recollection of any of that. Uhuh...

---

For completeness' sake, here's my scumlist:
Spy
Locke
Par
Dramonic
Special

[muzzz]

@Spy: I'd love to hear some more details about those new and exciting reasons. Especially the bits where I'm suddenly scummier than the guy you were pushing for yesterday.

I'm also interested in hearing why you're claiming the kill, but not the role.

---

If you were blocked, don't you think the scum would have shot directly at you?

QFT. The only way blocking but not killing would make sense is if most of the people on Nik's neutral list where scum. Looking at his last list from yesterday, that'd be Par, Farside, Locke and me. And while most of us are on at least one scumlist, I don't think anybody's accused us of being scum

together

.

---

I'll be V/LA starting tomorrow. I should be back on monday.

I'll be holding onto my vote until then, just to be safe.

[muzzz]

Sorry for the delay everyone. Blame Iceland.

---

@Nik: just because I'm V/LA doesn't mean you can pretend I said things. I never said in which order I posted my scumlist. And I mentioned Par

way

more than twice.

---

@DTM: I'm not sure if you want a reply to 502. But if you do, I'll have to ask you to rephrase the last paragraph in there, because I'm not sure I get what you're saying there.

---

@Spy: you ignored the questions I asked you just before I went V/LA. Why?

Also, I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to figure out that a confirmed-insane cop is just as good as a regular one. So why are you surprised that Farside is dead?

[muzzz]

Par is voting me with the same lack of reasons he had D1. Spy claims to have reasons but refuses to list them for the second consecutive day. And Nik is voting me because, apparently, not ordering your scumlists is scummy.

---

@Spy: I asked you to explain those "new and exciting reasons", as well as explain why you claimed the kill but not the role.

As for Farside, it's not her actual role that got her killed, but the scum's

impression

of what role she'd have. And they seem to have thought she was insane, because otherwise it really wouldn't make sense to kill her. Seems quite obvious to me. So again: why does it seem to surprise you?

---

@Nik: the order was Spy, followed by his likely buddies, followed by other potential scum.

Why did you fakeclaim a role that was unlikely to attract a NK?

[muzzz]

Muzzz, I definitely had reasons on D1. And I brought my vote back because someone who was scum Day 1 is still scum Day 3 - plus there's not really much to add to the case against you. You haven't really done much since Day 1.

No you

didn't

!. I, and other people, have pointed out half a dozen times that all you had was crap that applied to others just as much as it did to me. At least two times you promised to do a reread and then just went "muzzz is scummy" again. Other times you've claimed to have explained things a few times, while all you did was go "read my original post". Even Nik didn't get your reasons back then, and he's obviously not biased in my favor.

If

anyone

can give me one of the D1 reasons why you're voting me over Spy I'll take this all back. But until then I feel justified in saying you've never had any reason to vote me.

---

I've said my reasons even if I haven't drug them all out - the interaction between you and NS.

Yes, that's what you said yesterday. Why did you need Par to point out the actual scummy interactions?

Also, unless I missed something in this fakeclaiming-madness, it seems the scum never tried to shoot at Nik or his hiding spot. So no, apparently a hider who announces his target doesn't get shot at.

---

As for those "interactions" that Par pointed out, I can only guess at what went on in Special's head. And my best guess is that he didn't want to get listed on a D1 townie wagon.

---

@Nik: why are you ignoring my question?

[muzzz]

Almost forgot to post the good part:

- DTM is most definitely town now. It'd be game over already if he was scum.
- Spy is still scum. He was scum D1, then he lynched a townie, and for the past two days he's been setting up my lynch while doing his best not to stick his neck out.
- Par is still as likely to be Spy's buddy as he was D1.
- I don't like Nik's crappy reasoning to vote me, or him ignoring questions. And him admitting he's not a hider on the same day that Spy ups his claim seems like a bit of a coincidence. But I'll take DTM's word for it that Nik just does stuff like that. And he voted both Duck and Special over the course of D1.
- I have nothing useful to say about our absentee.

[muzzz]

Re. quickhammer - good point. I failed to consider that.

Re. Spy - I don't see why he'd have to be a SK. He could just as well be lying scum. It's not like a SK is going to come out and counterclaim. Theoretically, there could even be two scum kills each night, although I'm not sure if that would still qualify as normal.