Mini 1021: Battousai's Mountaintnous Mountain Mafia (Over)

[PranaDevil]

Bit defensive there suddenly? I merely said I found it curious and interesting. Which it is being as scum could have easily jumped on the previous wagon and obviously didn't, so if that was your intention it obviously wont be working.

Incidentally, as I say, I only said it was curious and interesting, I never said I felt you were outright scum because of it. The defensiveness based from nothing at all is noted however.

[iamausername]

I disagree about placing the third vote on the wagon being a tell in the RVS (It's very situational as a tell), but in the interest of getting a hearty bandwagon going,

Unvote, Vote: Prana

I would like a response to this even more now:

Much more lucrative place for a vote. Everyone come and hop on the Leech wagon.

I'm not seeing what sets him apart from other content-free posters like, say, commie, who already has a convenient wagon going on. Maybe you should hop onto that one instead?

Here is some motivation for you.

Unvote, Vote: ConfidAnon

[ConfidAnon]

Oooh. Sorry for missing the question.

Nothing, really, I just want a bandwagon to carry us out of the opening portions of the game.

[ConfidAnon]

Prana - I've never heard someone say "that was a curiously town move. interesting." Besides, either way, the inconsistancy in your post is still there. How can it be curious if you did the same thing?

[PranaDevil]

Because you outright said you just wanted to get a wagon going. How will any mafia see that and go "ah, must be a good lynch then"? I stuck with giving no information to see if others might follow, evidently they didn't, there's a small difference in doing it, which is why I'm curious about your way of trying things.

Also, nobody really says "that was a curiously scum move" either. It was a curious move, it's neither pro-town nor anti-town, it's just curious. But why are you acting so defensively? That's what's currently rubbing me up the wrong way now. Lee I understood, he was (as it seemed) being wagoned for no reason whatsoever, and it appeared to him to be people hurrying him to a lynch, so I can understand him being defensive and agitated that he's being wagoned so heavily. You don't get that privilage.

[LoudmouthLee]

Seeing as it's not worked. I actually had somewhat of a plan in voting for you Lee. At this stage I don't think you're scum. However, an early wagon can often draw up some opportunistic scum. So I threw a vote on you, and waited to see who did what with it.

As it would appear, we didn't get any scum coming out of the woodwork to try and drive the wagon any further forward, so it has become a bit pointless. But that will explain why I deliberately ignored your comments towards me until now. To answer them would have given the game up right at the first hurdle.

unvote

I'm somewhat curious as to you thinking I was going for an honest to god quick lynch though, you seem rather "jumpy" with your actions Lee. But at the moment I'll class that as possible town getting unnerved by a vote without a reason on them as I admit I have done so in the past.

But CA is also curious, considering you are admiting to voting me solely to get a wagon going. Interesting.

FoS still resting firmly on Saga as well though.

Firstly, a slight defense. I can't help it. There's a reason why I'm "LoudmouthLee". I'm loud, and I let my feelings known. That's a part of my play-style that will, probably, never change.

I'm curious about your "plan" and why you "chose me" for your plan. You say that you were trying to catch opportunistic scum. I'm unsure of that. You seemed to place a vote on me, and then instead of justifying it (as to see if the scum would jump on it), you merely said

Still quite happy with where my vote is currently lying.

It's counter-intuitive to the fact that you were trying to bait scum. If that was truly your intent, you would have tried to sell it much more than you did. Instead, you placed your vote on me, and decided to keep it there with nothing else to add. That doesn't seem like a bait to me.

Let it also be known that CA has changed his vote 3 times in 3 pages.

Vote: LoudmouthLee

Qualifying your vote as random? Want to make sure that no one suspects you for it?

I actually laughed at the role claim. What does "IGMEOY" mean?

But you are right, a bandwagon on you is not needed.

However, Unvote, Vote: Leech

Much more lucrative place for a vote. Everyone come and hop on the Leech wagon.

LmL - Pretty much all of those acronyms/terms are still in use. I had seen IGMEOY before, just never knew what it meant. Thanks!

I disagree about placing the third vote on the wagon being a tell in the RVS (It's very situational as a tell), but in the interest of getting a hearty bandwagon going, Unvote, Vote: Prana

With that being said, I will throw a

Major FoS: CA

out there, and I would be the ringleader of a bandwagon on either of these two guys.

To summarize, for those of you who feel i'm long winded.

The Case on Prana:

• Third vote on me to start a bandwagon, doesn't defend position, when pressured, unvotes and said "it was part of a plan."

The Case on CA:

• Three Votes on Three Pages. Seems to be trying to get a bandwagon started by hook or by crook.

We are, also, by far, the three most active players. (Prana - 9 posts, CA - 8 posts, and me, 7 posts.) I will keep that under consideration, as well.

[ConfidAnon]

Three Votes on Three Pages. Seems to be trying to get a bandwagon started by hook or by crook.

That is . . . exactly what I am doing.

Tell me, what's wrong with getting a bandwagon? They generate information on where people stand on various players. Information is good.

[LoudmouthLee]

Three Votes on Three Pages. Seems to be trying to get a bandwagon started by hook or by crook.

That is . . . exactly what I am doing.

Tell me, what's wrong with getting a bandwagon? They generate information on where people stand on various players. Information is good.

It's an interesting tactic. It's one that I don't subscribe to, and have found many scum in the day because of day 1 vote-hopping. Basically, I view it as one of two things.

• You're actually trying to get conversation started.
or...
• You're trying to get someone lynched... anyone but yourself.

Because my read on you isn't as strong as it is on Prana, my vote hasn't switched hands. It was more of "3 votes in 3 pages, getting the word out there for all to read." and letting you know that I was looking at you.

[iamausername]

CA, you say you are just trying to get a bandwagon going on anyone, but... you moved your vote away from LML, who had several other votes, and who you had actually given some kind of reason to vote onto Leech, who had no other votes for no reason. Why on earth would you think that that is an effective way of getting a bandwagon going?

And why are you just trying to get a random wagon going anyway when there are clearly actual serious cases being made in the game?

The way I see it, all this "I'm just trying to get a wagon going" stuff is just an excuse to avoid accountability for your votes, and I'm not going to stand for that.

[PranaDevil]

Lee, I picked you solely because you already had two votes on you, absolutely no other reason, at that time I had no clue if you were town or scum, just the knowledge I could get some info from not just yourself, but from others who might choose to hop on the wagon.

CA, what's wrong with a bandwagon? Nothing in essence, but there has to be a reason, throwing your vote onto absolutely everyone is helping nobody, for one you're not building a wagon by changing your vote so often because it isn't hanging around long enough to create a possible wagon. For two you've announced by your own hand that your ENTIRE reason for doing so is to find where people stand on various players... well you can not only do that without wagonning absolutely everyone, but by announcing what you are doing, you have destroyed it's effectiveness.

That was why I refused to give any more info on my voting for Lee, I couldn't give any actual reasons. I couldn't come up with any bullshit to spew to vote for him, as when I voted him I had no reason, but I wanted to make out I'd "seen something" that led me to him, hence saying the minimal at the time. The only person who did do anything was Lee himself, who jumped on the defensive fast, and as I have said, for good reason, so I feel he's possible town now.

CA is looking scummier in my eyes the longer this goes on, and... iamausername makes an exceptionally good point both with jumping onto Leech for no reason, and then the view of CA avoiding accountability for his actions. So with that in mind...

vote: ConfidAnon

[Nexus]

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to agree with iamusername.

CA, I find it very odd you switched your vote from Lee, which had three people on it, to another person. That's just prolonging the RVS, especially because your reasoning's been sketchy.

Plus, your bandwagons aren't achieving anything but put you under suspicion. So,

FoS:ConfidAnon

In other news, I nostalgia'd at your avatar.

[LoudmouthLee]

Lee, I picked you solely because you already had two votes on you, absolutely no other reason, at that time I had no clue if you were town or scum, just the knowledge I could get some info from not just yourself, but from others who might choose to hop on the wagon.

CA, what's wrong with a bandwagon? Nothing in essence, but there has to be a reason, throwing your vote onto absolutely everyone is helping nobody, for one you're not building a wagon by changing your vote so often because it isn't hanging around long enough to create a possible wagon. For two you've announced by your own hand that your ENTIRE reason for doing so is to find where people stand on various players... well you can not only do that without wagonning absolutely everyone, but by announcing what you are doing, you have destroyed it's effectiveness.
...

This is coming from the guy that posted the 3rd vote in me when the game was 6 posts old! There's nothing wrong with a bandwagon if there was a reason.... I find significant holes in your logic here.

[ConfidAnon]

CA, you say you are just trying to get a bandwagon going on anyone, but... you moved your vote away from LML, who had several other votes, and who you had actually given some kind of reason to vote onto Leech, who had no other votes for no reason. Why on earth would you think that that is an effective way of getting a bandwagon going?

And why are you just trying to get a random wagon going anyway when there are clearly actual serious cases being made in the game?

The way I see it, all this "I'm just trying to get a wagon going" stuff is just an excuse to avoid accountability for your votes, and I'm not going to stand for that.

It would be interesting to see, for instance, if player X wagoned player Y but not player Z. Also, you can learn things from reactions to erratic play. Haven't formed any ground-breaking conclusions yet except a scum read on Prana. As of right now, I am not trying to get a random wagon going. I wanted a random wagon with my LmL and Leech votes, however, I want a non-random wagon on Prana, he's the scummiest player so far. Coincidentally, the only actual cases I see are the ones that LmL has made on myself and Prana. Your question implies that you feel I am ignoring them in order to pursue random wagons. How am I doing this right now?

Lee, I picked you solely because you already had two votes on you, absolutely no other reason, at that time I had no clue if you were town or scum, just the knowledge I could get some info from not just yourself, but from others who might choose to hop on the wagon.

CA, what's wrong with a bandwagon? Nothing in essence, but there has to be a reason, throwing your vote onto absolutely everyone is helping nobody, for one you're not building a wagon by changing your vote so often because it isn't hanging around long enough to create a possible wagon. For two you've announced by your own hand that your ENTIRE reason for doing so is to find where people stand on various players... well you can not only do that without wagonning absolutely everyone, but by announcing what you are doing, you have destroyed it's effectiveness.

That was why I refused to give any more info on my voting for Lee, I couldn't give any actual reasons. I couldn't come up with any bullshit to spew to vote for him, as when I voted him I had no reason, but I wanted to make out I'd "seen something" that led me to him, hence saying the minimal at the time. The only person who did do anything was Lee himself, who jumped on the defensive fast, and as I have said, for good reason, so I feel he's possible town now.

CA is looking scummier in my eyes the longer this goes on, and... iamausername makes an exceptionally good point both with jumping onto Leech for no reason, and then the view of CA avoiding accountability for his actions. So with that in mind...

vote: ConfidAnon

Meh about destroying the effectiveness of the strategy. I probably could have held out longer, but you know what they say about spilled milk. How exactly am I avoiding accountability for my actions? I have explained so for my motivation for everything.

Plus, your bandwagons aren't achieving anything but put you under suspicion.

I don't see how this reflects upon my alignment.

[Nexus]

Plus, your bandwagons aren't achieving anything but put you under suspicion.

I don't see how this reflects upon my alignment.

It makes you seem desperate to get a lynch that you'll go for anyone. This, to me, is either a newbie town tell, or a scum tell. I'm going for the latter as I don't believe you are a newbie.

[Leech]

LmL: I find it a reason to be concerned that in this game, already, you've used appeals to experience on four separate occasions:

PranaDevil cast the third vote on me before people had even checked in.

In the Good Old Days

(Yeah, really showing my age), that was one of the easiest scumtells. Third vote in order to start a bandwagon. Especially in a mountainous game.

Look at most all of my games, in

the good old days

, when you made a vote that wasn't random, you used that to your advantage. You differentiated between a "vote with heft" and a "random vote".

Yeah. Uh-huh. I'm no newbie.

It's an interesting tactic. It's one that I don't subscribe to, and have found many scum

in the day

because of day 1 vote-hopping.

Why do you keep going out of your way to specify that "back in the day" your methods were successful? To me it seems like you are using that as a crutch to gain credibility for still trying to apply your outdated methods of scumhunting. There have been endless debates of theory on this site, and a lot of your extremely successful scumtells are common knowledge. What leads you to believe that the scum, in any game on this forum, wouldn't be aware of these tactics, and avoid them?

I don't think anyone in this game has questioned you about your game history or how successful you were in the past. So why do you feel the need to keep telling us? It really doesn't make your case any stronger, and in fact, looks like that's what you are going to fall back on when you get questioned. From my perspective, it's an easy out.

[LoudmouthLee]

Outdated? Hardly. The only reason I had brought up the "good old days" was that, on page one (and if you would have read that, you would have seen it), I was being semi-bandwagoned for typing in "Random Vote."

There. Now that I read for you, need a spoonfeeding too?

[ConfidAnon]

The fact that my bandwagons aren't achieving anything makes me desperate to get a lynch on someone who's not me? On Page 3?

[Xite91]

Hai Xite. Can I ask why you didn't answer my wonderful question?

(more later. kthxbai)

Ironically, this post was right after it;

I think it has something to do with the suspicion on you. I dunno, you two just seem to be scum-distancing to me (Of course it's RVS, so I'm waiting to actually vote you until you do something vote-worthy. Also, I've always wanted to lynch a commie )

Preview edit - Already on it

In other words... Saga, I

do

mind that he was answering for someone else... possibly mafia coaching, perhaps?

I'm going to ignore that as a part of the case, becuase Mr.Old Timer, there are plenty of times that I'll just facepalm at someone asking stupid questions, then I'll answer the stupid question, whether it was directed at me or not, I know others to do that too. Also, what if he were to try and push a lynch on me? Then come to find out that I actually DID answer the question. I'm more apt to believe that Saga is scum based on this than Prana, unless he's coaching Saga, but eh /shrug

@Everyone on this whole wagon thing, get over it, all of you used early scum-catching tactics, all of you seem to have failed, try something else

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to agree with iamusername.

CA, I find it very odd you switched your vote from Lee, which had three people on it, to another person. That's just prolonging the RVS, especially because your reasoning's been sketchy.

Plus, your bandwagons aren't achieving anything but put you under suspicion. So,

FoS:ConfidAnon

In other news, I nostalgia'd at your avatar.

Scummyscummyscumscum
I see a few things here, first one to point them out gets a cookie
Aside from other things I see in this, I like the attempt at buddying, too

@Prana - You're wagon-hopping too

It would be interesting to see, for instance, if player X wagoned player Y but not player Z.

Lolwut?

So, how about a Nexuslynch?
*all the kids in the background yell, hooray! yay!*

Unvote, Vote: Nexus

[Nexus]

Can I get my own cookie?

So if I agree with another user, who I believe to be a townie too, that means I'm a scumbuddy?

[PranaDevil]

Lee, I picked you solely because you already had two votes on you, absolutely no other reason, at that time I had no clue if you were town or scum, just the knowledge I could get some info from not just yourself, but from others who might choose to hop on the wagon.

CA, what's wrong with a bandwagon? Nothing in essence, but there has to be a reason, throwing your vote onto absolutely everyone is helping nobody, for one you're not building a wagon by changing your vote so often because it isn't hanging around long enough to create a possible wagon. For two you've announced by your own hand that your ENTIRE reason for doing so is to find where people stand on various players... well you can not only do that without wagonning absolutely everyone, but by announcing what you are doing, you have destroyed it's effectiveness.
...

This is coming from the guy that posted the 3rd vote in me when the game was 6 posts old! There's nothing wrong with a bandwagon if there was a reason.... I find significant holes in your logic here.

No Lee, my logic has no holes in it, you're just not understand where I'm coming from, but let me attempt to explain.

My point is that my reason for the wagon on you Lee was to see who needlessly voted for you with absolutely no reason. Which was my reason for voting you, it wasn't to get you lynched, it was to begin a wagon to see if anyone jumped on it without question. I've seen it work in the past. It doesn't even necessarily nail scum right off the bat, however it DOES have the benefit of getting us well out of RVS. And yup... it has. Page three and RVS is in the past.

However CA's wagons had no reason because the reason he's stating is nullified the very second he states he wants to wagon for the sake of wagoning. It's interesting to note that the second that is pointed out he is strongly pushing for my lynch. I would go so far as to say that CA is actually trying to push for my lynch now because he was caught out, and can no longer hide behind the random voting.

[Xite91]

Can I get my own cookie?

So if I agree with another user, who I believe to be a townie too, that means I'm a scumbuddy?

Nope, keep guessing.

Everything he just posted last post

@Everyone on this whole wagon thing, get over it, all of you used early scum-catching tactics, all of you seem to have failed, try something else

Trust me it's just easier that way. You're just clogging the thread with useless mafia discussion

[ConfidAnon]

However CA's wagons had no reason because the reason he's stating is nullified the very second he states he wants to wagon for the sake of wagoning. It's interesting to note that the second that is pointed out he is strongly pushing for my lynch. I would go so far as to say that CA is actually trying to push for my lynch now because he was caught out, and can no longer hide behind the random voting.

No, I am pushing for your lynch based on the curious comment after you said you tried to start a bandwagon. It seems, to me at least, that the only motivation to call something out as "curious" is to leave it open as an avenue of suspicion. This is hypocritical in regards to you wanting to start a bandwagon.

[PranaDevil]

Not got a clue where Xite is going anymore. I don't believe Nexus is scum after that post that Xite is claiming to have seen something in. How's about giving us your information rather than expecting us to play "guess the scumminess"?

and CA, your latest post makes no sense to me, I've stated exactly what I thought at the time, and the hypocritical thing I don't get... you are wagon hopping between anyone possible and not giving chance for these wagons you claim to want to ever pick up steam. I at least gave chance to see if anyone hopped on Lee's wagon. So don't try saying my plan and your plan were the same here. Hell, I wasn't saying what my plan was when I voted, and thus completely ruining the entire purpose of the vote in the first place.

[ConfidAnon]

Asking people to bandwagon on someone is not the same as saying "I am starting a wagon for the sake of reactions."

[PranaDevil]

lol what?

I don't even know where you're going with that one... it is the same, because we were both after the reactions of people. However you said you wanted to start a random wagon. That obviously shows that you had no clue if the player was scum (or knew they weren't ) and so no right minded scum would fall into that trap, as was already said it reads exceptionally like "I don't want to be responsible for my actions so I'll claim I'm voting randomly".