Open 248: Two of Four - Game Over

[Jora]

I don't think its possible to call someone a drifter after only 19 hours of a game, cause you would hate me then.

I already being corrected by the BlakAdder and mentioned that I mean by "drifting" something other, in particular "carring along by currents of the crowd", "saying the pleasant words and doing nothing to be notable". And well, you'll probably be very surprised to know that before I came here I was participated mostly in 24h=day "normal" games. Therefore I'm used to judge a player and make a conclusions by 2-3 posts and the manner in which he posts it.

So, let's return to our muttons. I assumed that Thor665 too bold for a scum . Since that by the rule of exclusion the scumteam is totally amongst:

BlakAdder
charter
edmund.angles
smashbro_of_the_SSS

smashbro_of_the_SSS suddenly strikes edmund, despite the fact that he would be more comfortable on the my vagon. Which makes me think of them bouth as a plausible scumteam: smashbro_of_the_SSS distancing himself from his partner at the right time.

Furthermore I think that BlakAdder and charter couldn't be a scumteam. But there is a very large chance that one of them is a scum.
I feel like threre will be more conversations between me and charter and again, I already vote him. So I better talk what i feel about BlakAdder.
BlakAdder doing apprehensive play. And I highly suspect him from the moment when he unvoted at the post 26. The manner of that was so hastily and seems so scummy. Thor explained nothing, he stayed exactly that reckless bandwagoning madcap as he truly are.

I say that it'll be the best for town to vote for one of the pair (BlakAdder, charter) and check (if we have a Cop or Blocker) one of the pair (edmund.angles, smashbro_of_the_SSS) or to do exactly the same but in a reverse order.

Edit to fix quote tags - Fen

[Fenchurch]

Second Vote Count of Day One:

}|{opa - 3 (CommieX, Thor665, charter)

charter - 2 (edmund.angles, }|{opa)
edmund.angles - 1 (smashbro_of_the_SSS)

Not Voting: 1 (BlakAdder)

With seven alive, it will take four votes to lynch someone.

Deadline is: Tuesday, 5th October at 10:41 am GMT.

[BlakAdder]

Opa, what do you mean about Thor explaining nothing? The sole reason I took my vote off of him is because at first he voted without giving reason, and after he did, I could see some logic behind it.
And on top of that, if what I did was so suspicious, why did you take so long to call me out on it?

[Jora]

Opa, what do you mean about Thor explaining nothing? The sole reason I took my vote off of him is because at first he voted without giving reason, and after he did, I could see some logic behind it.

The reason is that: you unvoted in a hurry. Yes, Thor explaining something, but inconsistent enough for releasing tention on him: the explanation he surfaced was the simple misunderstanding of why somebody pre-defined should claim last.

And on top of that, if what I did was so suspicious, why did you take so long to call me out on it?

It wasn't soooo suspicious but it is the most suspicious thing that I can find in your posts. Yes, I'm noticed it before, but that was a hint nothing more. Cautious scum is most dangerous one.

[Thor665]

I will also note that }|{opa is at L-1 right now.

Because late arriving players "accidentally" hammering is no fun for anyone.

Prepare to be tunneled if you do.

@BlakAdder - what are your thoughts on smashbro's play thus far?
@}|{opa - if you think I'm reckless then be prepared for true, full acceleration, no regard, Mafia when you play with some of the actually reckless people on this site.

The word you're looking for isn't 'drifting'.
It's 'following'.
On this site people often call it 'sheeping' or 'being a sheep' because it suggests the person is following the herd without thinking for themselves.

BlakAdder actually didn't follow onto the vote wagon I started and charter sheeped onto, so why do you see him as suspicious enough to be a lynch today? By your logic his unvote of me was weak, but you think I'm more likely to be town so scum wouldn't have a lot of reason to quickly unvote town for a weak reason, would they?

[BlakAdder]

@Thor: I really have no idea how I feel about smashbro. He's only made one post, and there's not a whole lot to take from it. I do find it strange, however, that he argues for the popular wagon, suddenly shifts gears and votes for Edmund instead for buddying up to Opa. Like I said, I'm really not sure what to make of it right now.

[Jora]

BlakAdder actually didn't follow onto the vote wagon I started and charter sheeped onto, so why do you see him as suspicious enough to be a lynch today? By your logic his unvote of me was weak, but you think I'm more likely to be town so scum wouldn't have a lot of reason to quickly unvote town for a weak reason, would they?

I never said that. Just pure mathematically divided my 4 suspects into two equal parts. My nominees for "Lynch of The Day" are charter from one part and smashbro_of_the_SSS from another.

[Thor665]

@}|{opa - what is it you didn't say?

Here's where you suggest BA as a lynch option for today.

I say that it'll be the best for town to vote for one of the pair (BlakAdder, charter) and check (if we have a Cop or Blocker) one of the pair (edmund.angles, smashbro_of_the_SSS) or to do exactly the same but in a reverse order.

Here's where you call me more likely town.

So, let's return to our muttons. I assumed that Thor665 too bold for a scum .

Here's where you not how BA's unvote of me is suspicious.

BlakAdder doing apprehensive play. And I highly suspect him from the moment when he unvoted at the post 26. The manner of that was so hastily and seems so scummy.

Why is his unvote of me suspicious if you think I'm likely to be town?

[Jora]

Hm... sorry. That one was ambiguous indeed. I mean to choose the scummiest ones from bouth pairs and try to lynch them. That who havn't been lynched goes to the Cop/Block.

By your logic his unvote of me was weak, but you think I'm more likely to be town so scum wouldn't have a lot of reason to quickly unvote town for a weak reason, would they?

If scum is overcautious he could do that when pretending to be a town. But the thing is that townies mostly inert in they actions, and not so quick to unvote, becose they couldn't know for sure worth it or not. I thinking trice before take you on the townlist.

[edmund.angles]

It seems like edmund is trying to support his partner, or at least trying to buddy up to another opa, and trying to make himself look like a good townie. He explains how it's good, and then goes on to vote charter. Looking to see if that vote sticks. however, this does seem scummy and like you're covering yourself, so unvote, vote: edmund.angles

@smashbro: People were saying it was plan only scum or the miller would benifit from- I don't agree so I wanted people to stop making a big deal about it. You and Thor (calling me "anti-town") can't tolerate people not accepting your logic.

@about the charter vote: I am by no means ready to lynch charter- I voted him for not posting before 12 hours had passed, close to a random vote. I wanted to do only two things by my vote:
1. Send a signal that lurking is not option.¨
-Lurking does not seem to be a problem in this game, though(and I appreciate the irony in that I have posted the least.).
2. Hold down a vote, since a heated athmoshere brings out the scum-slips.

I didn't like this quote:

edmund is pretty anti-town already, and acts proud about it, would be willing to consider his lynch.

@Thor: Do you truely have two people you are willing to lynch on page 2? And why do you alert scum to who you could be convinced to lynch.

While I consider the Miller claim a good idea, I did not appreciate that opa by own admission was willing to lie about being a miller.

Let suppose that there would be no real Miller, then I recieved a chance to lie and claim Miller for myself.

Lying is not acceptable.

I didn't like this either:

So, let's return to our muttons. I assumed that Thor665 too bold for a scum.

I see no reason to consider Thor bold, so I don't see the logic in excluding him from the scum possibility.

opa is scummy, mostly because he was willing to lie, but he is already at L-1.
And I am also suspicious of people who talks a lot but don't put down votes,

unvote: vote BlakAdder

[Thor665]

You and Thor (calling me "anti-town") can't tolerate people not accepting your logic.

I called you anti-town for setting up a policy lynch system in your first post. It had nothing to do with whether or not you agree with me about my scumtells.

edmund is pretty anti-town already, and acts proud about it, would be willing to consider his lynch.

@Thor: Do you truely have two people you are willing to lynch on page 2? And why do you alert scum to who you could be convinced to lynch.

Yes, I have two people I'm willing to lynch by page 2. I also had two people (counting myself) that I wasn't willing to lynch. Take issue with my logic for those conclusions or don't - but taking issue with the *speed* of them? I'm pretty sure scum are capable of figuring out who will or won't be a mislynch possibility. Also, if I don't talk about who I suspect then I'd be hiding my reads. I consider hiding reads to be more scummy then announcing them so scum can read them.

And I am also suspicious of people who talks a lot but don't put down votes

What about people who continually put down votes while clearly stating it is for policy reasons and not saying whether or not they find the people they are voting to be scummy?
Also, not voting for people they consider scummy and instead policy voting someone they don't call scummy...
I want everyone to remember this maneuver if }|{opa flips scum - I will.

I'll add edmund to my definitely willing to lynch today pile. I think he or }|{opa are looking like prime material. Does anyone have any meta knowledge on edmund? His wiki link is gakked up)

Those of you I don't have a read on yet should get in here and claim scum or town to speed things up.
CommieX - you're almost assuredly town, we need more input from you.

[Jora]

opa is scummy, mostly because he was willing to lie, but he is already at L-1.

Let me correct this. I'm not willing to lie for sure, just thinking about it.
Yes, I know the Golden Commandment of townies: not to lie. But sometimes little lie do big good for a town.
So you say that I'm scummy becouse was honest enought to admit that I feeled this temptation?

I see no reason to consider Thor bold, so I don't see the logic in excluding him from the scum possibility.

That makes sense. Therefore I should specify that I'm consider Thor as a town for today only. Even if I terrible wron at that part we have 1 scum in two pairs. Lets fish it out!

[Jora]

Guys, I'm ready if you would hammer me, but better don't be f* stupid! Don't repeat a classic mistake of lynching the most active player at day1. I'm tired of it. I'M NOT A NEWBSCUM!!!
Lets strike the scummiest middle or the lurker. They never give us a strong cases just because they don't talk much!

[Jora]

Stop hiding!

I saw BlakAdder and smashbro browsing this forum. But they prefered to keep silence. That's scummy.
I'm ready to vote for them at any moment. But I think that charter is scummier than BlakAdder and keep my current vote for now.

[Jora]

EBWOP: btw charter also been here at the time between my posts (#62 and #63).

[charter]

Hopa's posts and suspicions are looking super forced. Like how he's saying Blak is scummy for unvoting, what does he think town would have done, keep voting for a no longer valid reason? His suspicions on me are constantly changing, and is defending himself against my vote (and others on him) by saying I'm wagoning instead of defending the points against him. So what if I'm wagoning? Why should I not vote someone scummy just because everyone else is using the same reason I'm suspicious of him?

[charter]

There's probably others, I'll check when I get more time.

[BlakAdder]

Okay, Opa, you want me to speak up?
I'm officially ready to hammer Opa at any time. If anyone else thinks I should wait, then speak up, change your vote, do something. I'll give... let's say until nine o'clock tonight, my time. That's twelve hours from now. If my mind hasn't been changed by then, I'm hammering Opa.

[smashbro_of_the_SSS]

BlakAdder
charter
edmund.angles
smashbro_of_the_SSS

smashbro_of_the_SSS suddenly strikes edmund, despite the fact that he would be more comfortable on the my vagon. Which makes me think of them bouth as a plausible scumteam: smashbro_of_the_SSS distancing himself from his partner at the right time.

I voted edmund instead of you because i didn't want to put you that close to a lynch.

Also, I still support the opa wagon, and would also hammer it if need be. when opa suggested to lynch a person from one group, and cop/block someone from the other group, he lists 4 people, and evens tells the town that it could be flipped around if we want. what he really seems to be saying is that he doesn't care which of those four die. Of course, he has preferences, but this still doesn't make me feel good. its everyone but thor and commie x, a maybe confirmed town. It seems like he's keeping a lot of options open.

Guys, I'm ready if you would hammer me, but better don't be f* stupid! Don't repeat a classic mistake of lynching the most active player at day1. I'm tired of it. I'M NOT A NEWBSCUM!!!
Lets strike the scummiest middle or the lurker. They never give us a strong cases just because they don't talk much!

This screams ATE to me, which is scummy to me. he's trying to get out of the lynch saying its too early for one today. While I agree it's a bit quick, im confident in this lynch.

Stop hiding!

I saw BlakAdder and smashbro browsing this forum. But they prefered to keep silence. That's scummy.
I'm ready to vote for them at any moment. But I think that charter is scummier than BlakAdder and keep my current vote for now.

Yes, I was on the forum yesterday, but only to read. I don't think I posted in any of my games because I had a project to work on. I just wanted to keep up with the reading in my spare minutes.

[Thor665]

@charter - your read on edmund?
@BA - why would you rather lynch }|{opa then edmund?
@smashbro - what's your current case on edmund?
@edmund - what's the current case on charter?

Prior to a hammer I'd like to hear back from CommieX at least once and would like to hear my above questions answered - we have a lot of players who've only commented on the }|{opa wagon thus far, I'd like to spread the love around slightly.

[BlakAdder]

@Thor: The case on edmund so far revolves around the idea that he's buddying up to Opa, and in my mind that means the case sort of hinges upon whether or not Opa is scum. He seems to be at least trying to be pro-town, so I'm holding off on him for now. I don't think it's entirely fair to lynch him because he saw Opa's plan in a different light.
As a side note, on the off chance that Opa turns up town, I've got a contingency plan to help spot scum the next day.
Now if I my ask you a counter-question, why do you think edmund's argument for the miller massclaim was so supsicious? You and I both went along with the idea until CommieX claimed miller, then you suddenly thought the plan was highly scummy. Penny for your thoughts?

[Thor665]

Now if I my ask you a counter-question, why do you think

edmund's argument

}|{opa's plan

for the miller massclaim was so supsicious? You and I both went along with the idea until CommieX claimed miller, then you suddenly thought the plan was highly scummy. Penny for your thoughts?

Made an adjustment to your post to reflect what I think you were actually asking and will answer the question as it now stands. If I'm wrong then please rephrase the question.

I went along with }|{opa's plan because at the time he first announced it the logic was he was either Miller or scum, a 50% chance that he was a town power role meant he was well worth supporting in the initiative.
As soon as CommieX claimed Miller it recast the entire situation of why }|{opa had suggested the plan the way he had.
I sort of feel this was already made clear last time I explained it.

As a general note about edmund - I have no desire to see him lynched for either buddying with }|{opa or having issues with my scum tell on }|{opa. I want to lynch him for being open with anti-town policy and setting up a scum smokescreen for his later use.

[edmund.angles]

@BlakAdder: If you are willing to hammer then request a claim, and after the claim allow time for opa to self-hammer. What is your rush?

Yes, I know the Golden Commandment of townies: not to lie. But sometimes little lie do big good for a town.
So you say that I'm scummy becouse was honest enought to admit that I feeled this temptation?

@opa: Your willingness to lie is bad enough.
also: Why do you consider Thor town for today?

@Thor: I was unclear when I said you were intolerant. I meant to say it was because you dismissed my stance which I consider pro-town without any argument. That comment stayed in my head.

And I am also suspicious of people who talks a lot but don't put down votes

What about people who continually put down votes while clearly stating it is for policy reasons and not saying whether or not they find the people they are voting to be scummy?

@Thor: I say I found something suspicious, and I voted for the player who did it, that is not a "policy".

Also, not voting for people they consider scummy and instead policy voting someone they don't call scummy...
I want everyone to remember this maneuver if }|{opa flips scum - I will.

First of all: suspicious=scummy in my vocabulary.
Second: You need better reasons to hammer someone than to give them one vote.
Third: opa is scummiest

so far

, but not scummy enough to end the day so soon.

I consider hiding reads to be more scummy then announcing them so scum can read them.

True, but announcing two people you are definitely willing to lynch at the beginning of the day is taking the disclosure too far IMO.

Meta(requested by Thor):
forum games I've played:
https://www.mafiascum.net/archive/viewt ... 299b260a08(newbie, killed N2)
(A Coney Island game I can't find that I had to replace out of Day 1. )
looooong break....
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15071(Ongoing, killed N1)

[Thor665]

First of all: suspicious=scummy in my vocabulary.

The way you used them seems to suggest you weren't using them as synonyms to me.

opa is

scummy

, mostly because he was willing to lie, but he is already at L-1.
And I am also

suspicious

of people who talks a lot but don't put down votes,

Were you using suspicious instead of scummy just to use some different words in the post? It looks like you intended them to mean different things - that's why you used different words.

I consider hiding reads to be more scummy then announcing them so scum can read them.

True, but announcing two people you are definitely willing to lynch at the beginning of the day is taking the disclosure too far IMO.

Haven't you done the same thing with BlakAdder and }|{opa and maybe charter? That's three people.
Where are you drawing the distinction between stating suspicion and stating willingness to lynch?
It's not scummy to announce willingness to lynch players - that's how the game is played.

Thanks for the meta - will look it over.

[Thor665]

Bleh - edmund's "I like to lynch lurkers" strategy is obvious in his most recent game and equally ingrained in his early first game. Withdraw suspicion on that point though I will add to edmund that I believe the open declaration should come out of his meta right now - that's terrible meta to have for your town game and is only helpful for a scum game. Handle lurker policy lynches on a case by case and don't pre set-up a 'LOL, I'll lynch lurkers' excuse for end of day - if for some reason you need to vote a lurker at the end of the day just say so *then*.

Edmund goes back to neutral for me with some scummish vibes, there's still some oddities with his BA vote and I couldn't find meta to justify them.