NY 114: Mafia vs. Werewolves (Game Over)

[Parama]

Wait, so foilist, you're saying nhammen's accusations against you are completely valid?

unvote, vote: foilist13

Straight from the horse's mouth, foilist admits to being scum.

[Parama]

By the way, logic: If foilist agrees with nhammen's points against him, then they are in fact valid and my case against nhammen is invalid because foilist himself has said nhammen's words are true.

So foilist says that the main reason nhammen is calling him scum is indeed the truth. Basically, admitting to being scum. Good job mate.

[Chronopie]

The 'mason could be a cop', was x-game confusion. In another game (Ongoing - started about the same time), The anti-scum roles were distributed between the town, and the opposing scum faction, randomly, after the basics (i.e mason) were already assigned, therefore, in that game, a mason can be a cop.

The 'mason could be a werewolf' is based on the fact that masons are confirmed non-mafia, but not confirmed non-werewolf.

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

@Chronopie: No offense, but you are seriously not helping town with your discussions of mason posts. Start contributing or you will die.

[Parama]

I shouldn't have to do this but you guys will probably need it.

2)Clearly I was trying to get him to explain his role. I don't really understand how you didn't see that, but I appreciate you giving me the benefit of the doubt. Nhammen was wrong in thinking that what I was doing was inherently scummy. I do not however need to defend my vezo case here.

^this is admission of guilt^
Nhammen: foilist is rolefishing
Parama: Nuh-uh!
foilist: yes I'm rolefishing

Again. :s

3) FoS is the logical thing to do if you're already voting someone else. This is not scummy.

Missing the bigger issue. You and Chrono were accused of the same thing, yet nhammen votes you and doesn't even put Chrono on his scumlist.

nhammen was voting on the basis that asking for a role claim this early in the game was a scum move. If you take that as a given, his case was legitimate. It was pointed out to him that he was wrong, and he dropped the case. Scum move? I think not.

So you're saying he was wrong, yet you agree that he was right? Contradiction much?

Your initial case is therefore illegitimate and can therefore be discounted.

You have done nothing to disprove my case - all you've done is incriminate yourself in defense of nhammen. Hell, you might be buddies and nhammen was just getting an early bus in. I don't see why you're going to such great lengths to defend someone who was called out after a vote on you.

My questions were my major points. How could he possibly defend himself from them without claiming? Those were not rhetorical at all.

^more admission of guilt^

As I said before, Chrono's role searching was far more conservative than mine. I wanted to know his role. nhammen thought that was scummy. The fact that he thought Chronopie's posts were more legitimate is not at all implausible.

The two crimes are weighted equally since they same offense is being committed. Yet you defend nhammen's vote on you.

1) This was a ridiculous comment. However, this post by nhammen is the first one to lend some credibility to your case through no fault of your own. He does say that hidden rolefishing is scummier than blatant rolefishing. I was blatant rolefishing, Chronopie was hidden scumfishing (presumably).

Wrong, you were the one hidden rolefishing, and Chrono's was blatant.
Oh, haha, you're going off the basis that nhammen finds Chrono scummier than you, aren't you. Haha. That's hilarious.

2) His defenition of towniness was refering to the scum hunter, not the one being hunted. One has nothing to hide as in "if you want to rolefish, do it openly."

I think this is completely irrelevant to my point.

1) This was not asked in frustration. I legitimately wanted the answer.

^admission of guilt^

2) This is relevant to his role, and claiming would be the only real way of defending himself from it.

^admission of guilt^

3) This clearly is relevant to his being a mason, which is role information.

Wow, you're really trying to turn something that isn't rolefishing at all into rolefishing just so nhammen's case looks more valid? Why in hell's name would a townie do that?

Clearly you didn't have any main points, so what did you expect him to defend against exactly?

facepalm.jpg

1) No it is not a defense, it is a statement. A legitimate one incidentally.

If he's not even going to bother defending himself then I have every right to call him out for it, don't I?

1) You haven't made any valid points.

^total BS^

2) His argument hasn't changed, he's just taken a crack at finding scum.

??? what is this in reference to?

3) Yes it would lead to a scum lynch. That means that we can assume there will be scum on EVERY wagon until the end. One scum team will always be able to lynch someone who is not their own. This is a helpful legitimate point, not a weaksauce defense.

??? was there a point to this paragraph? I can't see one.

What

did

you do?

For starters, I didn't add pointless filler to my posts just to make them longer.

...what? An epic scumslip would far outweigh everything you've brought up about nhammen even if it was legitimate.

Maybe "epic scumslip" was an exaggeration. How about "large ping on a scumdar that isn't quite as big as nhammen's".

Now you're just tunneling.

I've BEEN tunneling. Yup. It didn't START at one point

You're lack of meaningful defense for your crap-case is noted.

What's the point of defending a case that's valid? What's the point of defending a case at all? A case is meant to attack.

To quote you: ^This is not a defense^

I'm not defending anything. So yes, nice observation, sherlock.

So this scum slip was enough to deter you from your nhammen case, but the epic one earlier was not? Interesting.

Lol. Wow. You're ignorant.

...so now nhammen's alleged degeneration of play is enough to outweigh Chronopie's scumslip? Even though you don't like Chronopie's defense?

I can call something a scumslip but it wouldn't look that way in everyone's eyes. What would you say if I said nhammen had scumslipped 3 times?

Now you're somehow managing to tunnel nhammen AND wagon hop at the same time. This is impressive.

I didn't wagon hop if I ended up right back where I started in short period of time.

Nhammen, I can't be a VI if I'm right.

Yes you can.

No, I can't.

You didn't make a good case, and you're a VI by mine.

Then at least 12 others in this game are even worse VIs. Are you willing to stand by your standards if your standards are wrong?

This concludes your posts. Based on what you've presented I see no reason whatsoever to vote nhammen. I actually see a lot more reason to vote you. However I'm going to reserve my vote for now until I've had a chance to analyze some of the other players.

Giving yourself a reason to vote later in case a wagon on me forms, eh? If you want to vote me, DO IT NOW SCUM.

[Sevis]

Jesus, I'm gone one day and I get to read 5+ pages to catch up. Ok, 1st,

unvote

. If vezo is town the the mafia have to deal with him, and he's no longer our problem. That unfortunately does not negate the fact that he is completely useless.

This lights up as scummy to me. If we know vezo is town, why would anyone have to ``deal with him''? And why specifically the mafia?

[Sevis]

Jesus, I'm gone one day and I get to read 5+ pages to catch up. Ok, 1st,

unvote

. If vezo is town the the mafia have to deal with him, and he's no longer our problem. That unfortunately does not negate the fact that he is completely useless.

This lights up as scummy to me. If we know vezo is town, why would anyone have to ``deal with him''? I see the third sentence as a werewolf slip.

[MichelSableheart]

Tenth vote count of day 1:

askbob (0):
Chronopie (5):

Unsight, Leafsnail, Timeater, The Goat, Dry-fit

daniel94581 (1):

Dr. Robotnik

Dr. Robotnik (1):

Super Smash Bros. Fan

Dry-fit (0):
foilist13 (1):

Parama

Leafsnail (1):

Vi

Lowell (0):
LynchMePls (0):
Midnight's Sorrow (0):
nhammen (8):

SerialClergyman, Chronopie, Seraphim, pman5595, Lowell, vezopiraka, LynchMePls, daniel94581

Parama (1):

Midnight's Sorrow

pman5595 (2):

nhammen, askbob

Pomegranate (0):
Seraphim (0):
SerialClergyman (0):
Sevis (0):
SGRaaize (0):
Super Smash Bros. Fan (0):
The Goat (0):
Timeater (0):
Unsight (0):
vezopiraka (0):
Vi (0):

Not Voting (4):

Pomegranate, SGRaaize, Sevis, foilist13

With 24 players alive, it takes 13 votes to lynch someone.

---

Seraphim has not posted in the last 48 hours and will be prodded.

[vezopiraka]

My explanation of why lowell is scum.

The mod didn't want to start the game early because lowell hasn't confirmed via PM. He then says that after lowell confirmed wants to give more time to the people with night talk abilities. He is not a mason or a monk therefore he must be scum.

Unvote nhammen
Vote Lowell

[SerialClergyman]

If we have 30 days of this I'll /wrists.

[Midnight's Sorrow]

My explanation of why lowell is scum.

The mod didn't want to start the game early because lowell hasn't confirmed via PM. He then says that after lowell confirmed wants to give more time to the people with night talk abilities. He is not a mason or a monk therefore he must be scum.

Unvote nhammen
Vote Lowell

This is false meta-ing. I doubt every word of this used against anyone.

[Midnight's Sorrow]

If we have 30 days of this I'll /wrists.

Slow and easy wins the race sir. Slow. And. Easy.~

[Vi]

If we have 30 days of this I'll /wrists.

Slow and easy wins the race sir. Slow. And. Easy.~

It's slow (by efficiency, not number of posts), but it's not easy.

Both of the attacks on foilist seem way out in left field. Oh look, one of them is from Sevis.

I'll grant that vezo's Lowell attack seems logical, and I was confused about the scum daytalk rule (which is not documented anywhere in the rules) as well. With that said one of the major reasons I joined this game had to do with confidence that MSableheart is a competent moderator, and I don't think going along with claims of mod-favoritism is going to be a good idea ITG.

[Vi]

Actually even if ModSableheart wanted to favor scum by giving them three days to scumtalk - and even if it was because he saw in the QuickTopics that the scum weren't talking to each other, either because they were busy or just not chatty - I don't think that in itself would force Lowell in particular to be scum. It would suggest that many but not necessarily all of the scum are relatively low contributors, though. (surprise)

You could ask Lowell why he didn't confirm via PM immediately though.

[Leafsnail]

"Gathering your thoughts" only involves responding when your name is called?

Indeed, it's a lot easier to respond to a post made specifically against you than everything that's happened on the thread.

I've already mentioned how bad it looks that after missing the nhammen wagon time-wise, you generically tut-tutted it while moving onto the obvious following wagon. You've said (since it became cool to dislike the hamwagon) that you had a newbTown read on nhammen. You don't bother mentioning why you think that or why the arguments are weak, just that the wagon is dumb.

If I'm honest... looking back, I'm having trouble seeing any serious points against nhammen.

Almost all of the points against him stem from Parama's case, which is entirely based on a chronopie/ nhammen scumteam, and considering how quick chronopie was on the wagon, I just don't see it. It's also odd how many of the people don't seem to have even bothered looking at the original Parama case (ie not looking at the one accused of being a scumpartner Chronopie).

Now really. On one side we have a number of fairly decent arguments for him being scum, and on the other side... your self-righteous word. Which one do you think I'm more likely to consider accurate?

I don't think you're scum for voting nhammen - he's acting stupid. It's more the way you've repeatedly changed between distancing yourself from the wagon and pushing it. I mean... you first go on to nhammen for fluff posting, then you jump to sevis for jumping onto the nhammen wagon in a bad way (as if he were to only one), then go back to nhammen for voting someone who isn't likely to have a wagon formed against them (given your previous vote, this actually looks quite funny), then you go BACK to sevis because apparently you've got "cold feet"... in addition to claiming chronopie town for NO reason and saying you'll attack anyone who voted chronopie.

I don't have a problem with votehopping in general, but doing it again and again and again with little to no reason isn't acceptable.

Never mind that I've left the wagon before and after that discussion because I got an honest-Town read from his posts.

Hence "switching back and forth between an easy newb lynch and your backup vote". It's the fact that you join AND LEAVE the wagon for no reason.

Which nicely leads to the other point in this most recent post of yours. I call you out for posting elsewhere onsite - and you have been posting elsewhere, in multiple places over the course of the last several hours - and you tell me that you're gathering thoughts. But apparently your thoughts only seem to include attacking the person bringing to light that you've been hanging around the site all night. I don't think this is an honest attack at all, especially since your mention of me going back and forth between nhammen and Sevis has already been laid out plainly inthread whereas your initial complaint about the wagon was concerned with people who joined the wagon for no reason at all. Those thoughts you were preparing were not only narrow, they were shallow as well.

It's a lot easier to respond to a single post than it is to respond to other things going on inthread. My initial complaint was that people were bandwagonning for no reason, but you randomly leaving the wagon, randomly calling chronopie town AND randomly saying you'll attack anyone who votes chronopie is a whole lot worse.

All in all... it feels far more like you're lining up mislynches than trying to find scum. You're calling a lot of people probably scum, and then leaving them alone, without any real pressure, as if to return to them later so you can strike them down more easily.

Since Sevis-scum doesn't seem very popular today I'll go ahead and give you what you asked for.
'Not sure if you as scum would go out of your way to stir up trouble like this, but I

did

say earlier that you were on the hatelist, so~

Unvote: Sevis

Vote: Leafsnail

(L-12)

Heh, another noncommital reason to unvote, another noncommital vote. In spite of all the "probscum" and "obvscum" you've mentioned throught the thread, you vote someone you're not sure of. Brilliant.

That said, I'm not sure if it's worth lynching you... the enemy scumgroup will probably take you out fairly quickly.

---

Is Chronopie attempting to pretend to look town yet? No? In which case, he still needs to die. The only content he's posted recently seems to be "LYNCH ALL ROLEBLOCKERS"... applied to a wagon started on the premise that he was scumbuddies with nhammen.

---

Parama's case on foilist is solid. Foilist actualy says "I was blatant rolefishing" so... yeah. As far as I can tell, Foilist was trying so hard to paint parama scum that he actually began attacking himself. It's reaching to the point of hilarity. Also, he seems confused as to whether he's trying to call nhammen scum or town.

[Lowell]

My explanation of why lowell is scum.

The mod didn't want to start the game early because lowell hasn't confirmed via PM. He then says that after lowell confirmed wants to give more time to the people with night talk abilities. He is not a mason or a monk therefore he must be scum.

Unvote nhammen
Vote Lowell

Wow that's stupid.

Just stupid enough to find you a ready excuse to jump off a nhammen wagon coming too close for comfort, I suspect.

[Dr. Robotnik]

SSBF, I already explained why I initially didn't answer your question, it was because I hadn't read the whole thread yet. Stop going back to something that I already explained.

As for lurking, I've only been able to get on the computer once a day. I have explained about my reasoning for the masons, and about my distrust of the nhammen bandwagon and the speed of which it has been formed.

You say pman was even more suspicious then me, yet it looks like your trying to form a second bandwagon on me. Explain yourself.

[Dr. Robotnik]

SSBF, I already explained why I initially didn't answer your question, it was because I hadn't read the whole thread yet. Stop going back to something that I already explained.

As for lurking, I've only been able to get on the computer once a day. I have explained about my reasoning for the masons, and about my distrust of the nhammen bandwagon and the speed of which it has been formed.

You say pman was even more suspicious then me, yet it looks like your trying to form a second bandwagon on me. Explain yourself.

[vezopiraka]

Ok. Enough with my random mod gaming. Although I don't like how lowell responded to the case. You say I jumped when the wagon got to close to a lynch. In fact I jumped when the wagon on nhammen lost some supporters. Now you made me sure your scum lowell.

[Vi]

I've already mentioned how bad it looks that after missing the nhammen wagon time-wise, you generically tut-tutted it while moving onto the obvious following wagon. You've said (since it became cool to dislike the hamwagon) that you had a newbTown read on nhammen. You don't bother mentioning why you think that or why the arguments are weak, just that the wagon is dumb.

If I'm honest... looking back, I'm having trouble seeing any serious points against nhammen.

Almost all of the points against him stem from Parama's case

, which is entirely based on a chronopie/ nhammen scumteam, and considering how quick chronopie was on the wagon, I just don't see it. It's also odd how many of the people don't seem to have even bothered looking at the original Parama case (ie not looking at the one accused of being a scumpartner Chronopie).

I've only lightly skimmed everything Parama has said since he started tunneling on SSBF. I've been reading SerialClergyman's posts.

Now really. On one side we have a number of fairly decent arguments for him being scum, and on the other side... your self-righteous word. Which one do you think I'm more likely to consider accurate?

I don't think you're scum for voting nhammen - he's acting stupid. It's more the way you've repeatedly changed between distancing yourself from the wagon and pushing it. I mean... you first go on to nhammen for fluff posting, then you jump to sevis for jumping onto the nhammen wagon in a bad way

(as if he were to only one)

, then go back to nhammen

for voting someone who isn't likely to have a wagon formed against them

(given your previous vote, this actually looks quite funny), then you go BACK to sevis

because apparently you've got "cold feet"

...

in addition to claiming chronopie town for NO reason and saying you'll attack anyone who voted chronopie

.

I don't have a problem with votehopping in general, but doing it again and again and again with little to no reason isn't acceptable.

*posts Cobalt's avatar here*

First bolded: I have but one vote.
Second bolded: Kind of a flimsy caricature of my reason but it's not like you're reading.
Third bolded: I concede I didn't say why at the time. I did more recently; I impulsively decided the n00bTown read I'm (still) getting from his posts overrides what SerialClergyman was saying.
Fourth bolded: Intuition is a reason, albeit not a convincing one for others. I DO know that I said I was using Chronopie's wagon as a catch-all basin for the people I found scummy because they all happened to be there, rather than because they were on Chronopie.

Never mind that I've left the wagon before and after that discussion because I got an honest-Town read from his posts.

Hence "switching back and forth between an easy newb lynch and your backup vote". It's the fact that you join AND LEAVE the wagon for no reason.

"No reason" is stretching the truth a bit, as mentioned before.

All in all... it feels far more like you're lining up mislynches than trying to find scum. You're calling a lot of people probably scum, and then leaving them alone, without any real pressure, as if to return to them later so you can strike them down more easily.

Well, consider.
*I only have one vote. It's hard to put "real pressure" on five people simultaneously. However, I

have

made attacks on the suspicious players' posts as they've made them, so there's no ambiguity.
*It's Day 1 in a 24-player game; 13 people have to agree to lynch (more specifically, 12 people have to agree with me).
*Not everyone agrees with me, and given the scumhunting techniques going on ITT not everyone is GOING to agree with me. Given that it IS Day 1 and not everyone I believe is scum will turn out to be scum, this is not necessarily a bad thing. (see: Mafia Dodgeball)
*History shows that more often than not a VI (of any alignment) gets lynched D1 in Large Games because it's the kind of player people can agree to lynch. (see: New Age Mafia, Mafia 87, Caught in the Crossfire) And that's fine; it's D1. However, I can press on the wagons that I believe are more likely to hit scum.
*All of the people I think are scum have zero votes on them, so any one of them I pick is the largest bandwagon to push. Similarly, I don't agree with the foilist accusations and I'm presently in wait-and-see mode for Chronopie, so I'm not on those wagons.

Does everything make sense here?

Since Sevis-scum doesn't seem very popular today I'll go ahead and give you what you asked for.
'Not sure if you as scum would go out of your way to stir up trouble like this, but I

did

say earlier that you were on the hatelist, so~

Unvote: Sevis

Vote: Leafsnail

(L-12)

Heh, another noncommital reason to unvote, another noncommital vote. In spite of all the "probscum" and "obvscum" you've mentioned throught the thread, you vote someone you're not sure of. Brilliant.

That said, I'm not sure if it's worth lynching you... the enemy scumgroup will probably take you out fairly quickly.

You DID ask.~ And I'm being quite transparent about how I feel about your motives.
Meanwhile, is this a noncommittal nonvote from your direction?

Why would I be taken out at night fairly quickly?

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

As for lurking, I've only been able to get on the computer once a day. I have explained about my reasoning for the masons, and about my distrust of the nhammen bandwagon and the speed of which it has been formed.

I really don't see that as a good excuse. I looked at your profile and you've been able to post 1.33 per day. So surely you have enough time to post at least once a day here and contribute to something.

You say pman was even more suspicious then me, yet it looks like your trying to form a second bandwagon on me. Explain yourself.

Pman5595 hasn't posted much substance and has been less active then you, but your activity level has also been terrible and you haven't really posted much substance either. Plus, you've parroted a bit, which made you more suspicious in my eyes then pman5595.

Also, I am not attempting to form a bandwagon on you. I find you genuiously suspicious enough to warrant a vote, but I didn't say "VOTE FOR Dr. Robotnik! PEOPLE!".

[foilist13]

@Parama: try to read.

1) I said earlier in the thread that I wanted vezo to claim.
2) I explained why that was a pro-town stance.
3) Based on my explanation, nhammen stopped voting me.
4) Other players supported my argument before and after my defense.

So how is me referencing my attack on vezo a scum tell in any way?

nhammen misinterpreted what I was doing and found it scummy. He saw Chronopie doing something similar.

Like I said in my wall post, if you take nhammen's MISINTERPRETATION as a given (this is logic, so I hope you can keep up) then I appear far more scummy and am the logical vote. Since it was a MISINTERPRETATION as I have already shown, then I do not come up scum at all, and certainly did not incriminate myself.

[Parama]

You have until your next post to vote me or die a horrible death.

[Timeater]

do it do it do it

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

You have until your next post to vote me or die a horrible death.

Why do you want votes on you? I see no benefits in this whatsoever. As any factions, you want to avoid votes period.

@Timeater: You are seriously not helping. I'm tempted to vote you just because of that worthless post.