Mini 410 - McDonald's Mafia [Game Over!]

[pete d]

vote: DeanWinchester

random random random

[pete d]

It has done a good job of generating discussion, and I have to agree with Glork that I am mighty suspicious of those who took the oppertunity to jump on me for that.

I don't think it's such a big deal either way. People jumped on (ie. commented, not voted) because it was a weird thing to do. I don't really think it made much sense. (I guess it did generate some discussion). The only person who voted you as a result was FA, who doesn't agree with the idea one bit. If more people wagoned you, i think it would be a bigger deal, but they didn't. From my perspective, I don't really find it much scummy on SC's part, just an attempt to create discussion (as he has said).

[pete d]

you called me out for a bad reason.

I don't think it's a bad reason. FA took (i think valid) exception to your play.

btw, it may have generated discussion, but >half the town is still random voting

[pete d]

okay... FA voted you before you came back (i think). So it was based on the initial proxy, which was unusual, somewhat confusing. Basically you gave your vote to someone you supposedly don't know and shouldn't trust, just because they are good player. Basically, I think your idea was distracting, confusing and kinda pointless.

I'm finding your comments somewhat scummy, ie. your jumping on FA for voting you. I think FA did clarify his reasons pretty well.

[pete d]

@SC: I wasn't siding with FA because of the initial proxy. I was siding with him because of your subsequent actions, that is, jumping on people who have criticised your idea. What has it done, really? a) put you on side with glork b) most people have said it was strange c) Given you somebody to jump onto for criticising it.

A) I find it odd that Pete D is accusing SC's posts of being scummy while leaving his (random) vote sitting around on DeanWinchester. Sometimes it's indicative of distancing, sometimes it's indicative of scum going after town, occasinally it's indicative of just bad pro-town play. When you move from "random" to "serious," you should almost always take your vote with you.

Yeah, I probably should have done that.

unvote

. I'll drop an

Fos: Amb

(that last post seemed a bit scummy to me).

vote: StallingChamp

I just woke up, I'll try and make more sense later. zzzz

[pete d]

1. I did it for his overall reaction, not just the vote. Note that even with my explanation, he has failed to back down or unvote.

2. So a scum could vote for you because your name ends in "d" as long as he clarifies his reasons pretty well?

3. If you want to attack me, fine. Don't side with someone though. Seems like he's trying to be able to blend in with a croud later.

4. Following instructions to look town AND some massive OMGUS all in one! Seems like Glork was right.

1. FA has already explained and clarified his reasons for voting you. As for your explanation, I still think that you were too keen to attack FA. Surely you expected SOME criticism of your play.

2. This is the worst logic I have ever seen.

3. and 4. Extreme hypocrisy. Not only have you completely sided with Glork, as shown repeatedly in your posts, but you are also guilty of extreme OMGUSing against FA.

SC, you look so so scummy to me right now.

Im going to follow Glork, since people seem to have unerring faith in him. Also for the irony of his statement "Following someone else's lead on a bad stance ... is usually scummy". Glork clearly doesn't think he is leading on a bad stance.

How is this a good reason to vote somebody. (then again, it does smack of irony, so i can't tell whether she's serious or not).

[pete d]

the wagon has built because there's really not that much to vote for on a Day 1. It's not about whether someone is "obvious scum", rather the most scummy / most likely to be scum from the small amount of information available to the town on Day 1. Wagons also give the town a chance to examine reactions / posts from players to the wagon etc etc. until something else comes up.

[pete d]

unvote, vote: DeanWinchester

his wagon of Dos and attack of Amb and DoS feels to me like he's trying to spread suspicion around. Plus, he provides little reasoning for his wagoning vote.

also

fos: PinkPrincess

I notice she's been posting a reasonable amount and commenting on the slowness of the game, but she hasnt really committed to any strong stance against any player. She seems to be blending into the background a bit.

[pete d]

@PP: When I made that post, you seemed to be making arguments and commenting on a few things you found suspicious, but not backing them up with votes or even Fos's. Seemed a bit too cautious for me.

[pete d]

unvote, vote: DoS

that last post doesn't make any sense. first he says good reasons to be voting Amb, then unvotes and says that his vote was just an omgus; "I do actually feel pete d is scum", so this means that you didn't feel that Amb was scum but wagoned anyway? And if you felt I was scum so strongly, why not keep the vote on me from the start?

[pete d]

i guess thats a claim then

[pete d]

a flavor might help?

[pete d]

unvote

[pete d]

my unvote pretty much implies that i think his claim is ok, enough at least for me to unvote and have some more discussion / weigh up whether to revote him or vote someone else. sorry for the confusion.

[pete d]

thats a lunch

[pete d]

I'll put a

vote: Zarvok

for now, he defended DoS yesterday and tried to keep pressure on me (as did DoS); also threw some Fos's around. Weirdly, they both voted each other at the start of Day 1.

[pete d]

[pete d]

So far, PP and Omega are the only people striking me as 100% town

PP is todays lynch

any particular reason for the change of heart?

I don't think Glork's claim warrants much comment, other than: the claim is credible, but spulock could be percieved as anti-McDonalds. His arguments against Dos throughout day 1 suggest that he is not mafia, so i buy it for now.

As for Amb, should we lynch him, say, if he remains alive tomorrow? or lynch him today (prob. not imo)? surely scum would've targetted him... which makes me think that a RB (if there is one) would have some pretty good info right now.

[pete d]

First of all, FA isn't the cop. And if he was, he couldn't get a guilty on me. And with that, we all shall move our votes and suspicions to a better place.

don't you just HATE "i'm innocent" reasoning like that

Pete D -- Are you trying to fish for FrAt to claim cop?

don't you just HATE loaded questions like that. If FrAt's suspicion of PP was purely non-role related, which it could be, why not just say "this is why I find PP overwhelmingly scummy". If it is role related (not necessarily cop), of course I don't want a claim yet, I want discussion to try and out more scum. Say he was a cop, he claims, everyone wagons, day ends. Not the most helpful to town.

I kinda agree with DW:

Fos: Amb

but we're never going to vote you at the moment.

As I said before, in the absence of a counterclaim, there is no reason to lynch Amb. If Amb is scum and there is a Doc out there somewhere, they should wait until the day before LyLo to counterclaim. That way, even if we lynch the wrong person, the town hasn't lost yet. The scums are not going to be able to play WIFOM games with us and trick us into lynching Amb if he's really a Doctor.

must have skimmed over this one, but you're right.

[pete d]

i figured as much.

unvote, vote: PP

@TCS: who softclaimed townie? it wasnt your post 325 was it?

as for a third scum, i'm thinking probably Zarvok or Omega, possibly yellowbounder. as for TCS, who knows.

[pete d]

i really want fries now

[pete d]

unvote

for the moment

i guess that means that there must be some sort of night-protected role. either that, or there is only 1 killing group (possible) or someone didn't choose to kill last night (possible, but not likely).

the fact that we are now most likely looking for scumbuddies changes things somewhat. I'm thinking of a Zarvok/Dean pair, for several reasons. Zarvok for interactions with DoS yesterday; Dean for attacking my reasons for voting Zarvok earlier; asking PP for a claim, but then not waiting and going lynch -1; fishing for SC to full claim when there was no reason too; general role-fishing whilst remaining opposed to mass claiming.

[pete d]

vote: NAR

for reasons I previously mentioned

[pete d]

Pete D: seems like he doesn't know what he's talking about and accuses people without stating a good reason why. calls everyone scummy, although he is in fact acting very scummy (1). He also pressures a lot of people for no apparent reason. I have no idea why he voted on me. He said he voted on me for reasons previously mentioned.... and he didn't even state any reasons (2). Dragon voted on Pete to make him close to lynch, but maybe that was to rid Pete of suspicion later (3)?

1) i do not call everyone scummy. the people who i have called scummy so far are: SC early on day 1 (I;ll admit that I wasn;t thinking very well or paying enough attention on day 1, and i apologise), DW on day 1 and 2, Amb on day 2 (

unfos

btw) and NAR / zarvok on day 2.

2)

I'll put a vote: Zarvok for now, he defended DoS yesterday and tried to keep pressure on me (as did DoS); also threw some Fos's around.

the fact that we are now most likely looking for scumbuddies changes things somewhat. I'm thinking of a Zarvok/Dean pair, for several reasons. Zarvok for interactions with DoS yesterday; Dean for attacking my reasons for voting Zarvok earlier; asking PP for a claim, but then not waiting and going lynch -1; fishing for SC to full claim when there was no reason too; general role-fishing whilst remaining opposed to mass claiming.

3) what a load. DoS pushed for my lynch all day, as did your predecessor.

NaR's whole analysis strikes me as complete garbage. however, I will

unvote

to consider the PP / DW issue.

[pete d]

Pretty sure NAR is just a really bad player.

but then you've still got Zarvok's interactions with DoS on Day 1.

@MM: how can PP prove her claim? if she is scum, she'll just make up a result and pretend to be naive or paranoid or whatever.

[pete d]

something just twigged in my brain:

My title is Obese Customer. I am a doctor because I steal the poisoned burgers being fed to the mafia victims and eat them.

My body is so well adjusted to eating junk food that the poisons just get filtered through

, and the victim goes hungry for the night but survives.

(emphasis added)

BUT he can't self protect? the role mechanic makes no sense. surely if he is safe from someone else's poison, he should be safe from being directly poisoned.

vote: PP

In light of DW's role, hers seems a bit fake, given the striking similarities. The circumstances of the RB and lack of kills make her more likely to be mafia. + her hesitation in committing to any vote yesterday, but still spreading suspicion, as well as holding off on DoS for a whiles.

[pete d]

yeah, i believe DW's claim over PP's, if he is lying he would get lynched either today or tomorrow, don't make no sense; whereas PP was getting close to lynch.

[pete d]

for a vanilla, YB's interactions with DoS do look suspicious.

unvote

I'm sure there's no shortage of people lining up to hammer, but I'm still interested in what Stalling has to say.

[pete d]

for a vanilla, YB's interactions with DoS do look suspicious.

unvote

I'm sure there's no shortage of people lining up to hammer, but I'm still interested in what Stalling has to say.

[pete d]

whoops sorry about that double post. man, will this freaking day ever end... well, I guess it shouldn't be that long now

[pete d]

From what TCS and SC have said, YB *seems* to have paraphrased reasonably. I don't know whether or not he'd be allowed to specifically elaborate without it being considered quoting. I guess that's a matter for the mod to decide.

@NaR: I think we have established SC is vanilla. TCS was the first to comment after YB's claim, and according to SC TCS was spot on. TCS is obv. vanilla.

[pete d]

I think I'll trust SC on this one. He seems the most clued in re the whole vanilla role flavour; he was sure about DoS, and he is sure about YB.

vote: YellowBounder