Mafia 60: Face-to-Face - Game over!

[Zindaras]

Oh, wow, I somehow completely missed that post.

UnFoS

, I guess...

Teehee.

*points and laughs*

[Fritzler]

You didn't ask me, Fritz?

:no:

if that was a smilie, he'd be shaking his head and have a sad lookon his face

[Mgm]

That's quite a strange sort of a defence. Obviously we don't know whether or not you were, but the wording and timing suggests it. This isn't a game of certainties.

My point was that Glork is assuming the worst with no evidence to back it up. I never tried to lynch CDB, so assuming that was my aim has no basis in either fact or logic.
Try Occam's Razor it works like a charm.

[Adele]

Wow. Like, *bang* that happened fast. Sorry for my absence (at exactly the moment the rest of you turn up), and I'll post properly in a couple hours.

[Glork]

That's quite a strange sort of a defence. Obviously we don't know whether or not you were, but the wording and timing suggests it. This isn't a game of certainties.

My point was that Glork is assuming the worst with no evidence to back it up. I never tried to lynch CDB, so assuming that was my aim has no basis in either fact or logic.
Try Occam's Razor it works like a charm.

Bzzzt. Fail.

I am most certainly

not

naive enough to give you the benefit of the doubt,

ESPECIALLY

if I

already suspected you

for other reasons. And evidently, I am not alone in this most recent suspicion. In my eyes, you're guilty until proven innocent.

[Thesp]

Thesp: why aren't you voting for Glrok?

I don't find the case against him that compelling. Also, I think scum would be less likely to parody the reason a townie is being run up on votes.

I seriously don't like the way Thesp's playing. I don't feel he's contributing to the game.

I agree. I feel like I've fallen dow on my duties.

I'm still most uncomfortable with ChannelDelibird, particular with his actions D1 (following a townie's bandwagon with support and little other contribution, and deliberately not reacting to something he knew was to elicit reaction). His D2 play is consistent with how I would expect scum to play had they been lurkish on D2 and trying to make up for it. I am trying to ascertain if it would be consistent with townie play, and I don't feel like it is.

This is probably the strangest set of interactive suspicions I have ever seen. It actually makes me wonder if maybe the Mafia is just sitting back and letting a bunch of townies rip each other apart.

I have definitely felt this way.

Thesp, you asked why I wasn't voting CDB, which is a bold, somewhat manipulative question for you to ask considering I'm currently voting for you.

It helps me figure out player interactions. It's a new tactic I've been using.

I still don't buy the case against MGM, either. I'm much happier seeing CDB run up today.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

In my eyes, you're guilty until proven innocent.

That's a bad mindset as it leads to circular reasoning. The correct mindset is possibly guilty until proven otherwise.

[Patrick]

I would just like to say that this is my 2000th post on the site yay, and that I do buy the case against Mgm. I could see an Mgm/Adele team, with maybe Thesp as the third.

[ChannelDelibird]

I'm still most uncomfortable with ChannelDelibird, particular with his actions D1 (following a townie's bandwagon with support and little other contribution

I admit my play on D1 was bad, but I don't think you can really criticise people for the AndrewS wagon.

and deliberately not reacting to something he knew was to elicit reaction).

You mean I should have gotten defensive and let you wagon me for overreacting?

His D2 play is consistent with how I would expect scum to play had they been lurkish on D2 and trying to make up for it. I am trying to ascertain if it would be consistent with townie play, and I don't feel like it is.

Then how exactly would you expect a townie to play if they had been lurkish on D1 and trying to make up for it on D2?

I feel good with a

vote: Thesp

[Zindaras]

Wooo, Thesp PbPA!

Post 0 (starting with zero because that's what the view all post function starts with):
AndrewS vote. Glork is apparently pro-town.

Post 1:
Filler/joke.

Post 2:
Apparently, the last time an experienced player suggested No Lynch with Thesp in the neighbourhood of Thesp, he was scum. Amusingly enough, this is obviously a logical fallacy. You can't simply state "Last time I was right, so I'm right this time as well". If you want to use the argument "Experience+Suggesting No Lynch-->Scum" pointing to the last time someone experienced suggested a no lynch, you have to look at multiple times. Given Thesp's experience, I have no doubt that he has seen it happen before.

Post 3:
Apparently, CDB is now AndrewS's scumbuddy.

I'm not convinced by that explanation. I also feel that if you feel you learned something from it, telling the town who you feel made a scummy reaction to your post would help your position (if it's justified, of course).

FoS: AndrewS

That's the relevant quote.

Amusingly enough, two others, Cessy and I, FoSed AndrewS and are, apparently, not attempting to distance ourselves from our scumbuddy.

Post 4:
He suggests that scum is more likely to suggest a No Lynch. In my experience, even with experienced players, players who suggest No Lynch are more likely to be town than scum, simply because it attracts so much flak.

Post 5:
Attacking AndrewS for discrediting people who are voting him. Amusingly enough, with AndrewS dead and town, his argument actually stands. Also stating again that CDB is scum.

Post 6:
Filler.

Post 7:
As AndrewS points out in the post afterwards, this is actually not even what he suggested. AndrewS suggested that it is a good idea to look at the bandwagon to look at scum, which it is. Townies have legitimate reasons to vote town, but scum just wants to see town die. There will, in fact, be a difference between a town-on-town vote and a scum-on-town vote.

Post 8:
First part is a strawman, taking AndrewS's example instead of the entire bit of logic.

Post 9:
Random assertion. I don't believe it holds up to a quantitative analysis.

Post 10:
Move on.

Post 11:
Move on.

Post 12:
Accusing Nightfall of deflecting the AndrewS lynch...

Post 13:
I'd like to point out how this is already setting up Ether for a next lynch with AndrewS-town.

Post 14:
Now MBL is scum too. Again, like with CDB, no real explanation.

Post 15:
Filler.

Post 16:
Move on.

Post 17:
Filler, move on.

Post 18:
The "day's going on for too long post". Amusingly enough, this is one of the things scum is more likely to say than town.

Post 19:
Sets himself up to vote spectrumvoid later on.

Post 20:
More pushing for AndrewS lynch.

Post 21:
Question to AndrewS, move on.

Post 22:
More debating with AndrewS.

Post 23:
Filler, move on.

Post 24:
More filler, move on.

Post 25:
Answer to a question from Glork.

Post 26:
Wow, we shouldn't be voting spectrumvoid. What a surprise.

Post 27:
That's some messed-up theory.

Post 28:
Thesp is uncertain about Mgm.

Post 29:
I feel that I have already rebutted this argument. I feel that Thesp is trying to coerce me into voting AndrewS there by saying that not voting AndrewS is the same as voting nobody.

Post 30:
*gasp* Thesp was wrong!

Post 31:
*gasp* Pro-town Thesp can be wrong!

Post 32:
Argument. Move on.

Post 33:
Response: the day shouldn't have ended in an AndrewS lynch. 'Nuff said.

Post 34:
Doesn't like ChannelDelibird, MrBuddyLee, Nightfall and Zindaras. Amusingly enough, his "case" on the first three, or whatever I can glean from his earlier posts, seems mostly built on the assertion that AndrewS is scum, which he wasn't. His last one is a "vibe".

Post 35:
He apparently feels there isn't much on anyone.

Post 36:
Response to MBL.

Post 37:
Response to CES.

Post 38:
Response to MBL.

Post 39:
Woe is me! We do finally get to know why he thinks CDB is scum, though.

Thesp's playing either really sucky or he's just plain scum. Pretty much everything he's said Day 1 was built on "AndrewS is scum". He hasn't really said anything Day 2.

[Patrick]

Thinking about it, I think I'll

Unvote, Vote: MgM

because I really don't like his recent responses. I'm still pretty suspicious of Adele and Thesp though.

[MrBuddyLee]

"Buy the case against MgM" is hardly an original case against him, and looks suspiciously like shuffling one's feet towards the shorter line at Wal-Mart and hoping no one notices you're cutting in.

[Patrick]

I worded it that way just because of Thesp saying he didn't buy the case against Mgm. Your last post makes it sound as though I've never had any suspicions of Mgm before making that post.

[MrBuddyLee]

True, you have made plenty of comments on him before--I just woke up, read the thread and your post looked lazy-ish to me so I commented.

Your case against Mgm doesn't make it sound like you're significantly convinced:

I've read MgM's posts and some of the accusations against him. He's made some odd posts, and hasn't paid attention at times. As I noted before his attack on Glork was strange and felt like he was sticking to a rigid policy of just voting anyone suggesting no lynch. I don't know, there seems to be less going against him that I had first thought. I'm not sure I find him any worse than ppl like Adele or CDB.

MgM: I think the day 1 case against him was overstated. However, the defences he's used today for asking spectrumvoid to claim set off alarm bells with me. If you think someone is a powerole, you step up to defend them if needed. I am struggling to reconcile what MgM did with a pro town mindset. Interesting is how Adele said "Someone owes someone an apology, which seemed to be a way of avoiding taking a side. Last thing on Mgm is that his vote for Glork in post 465 felt strangely oppotunistic. More likely than average to be scum.

Odd posts, not paying attention, obstinacy are mealy-mouthed reasons scum use to incriminate people they know aren't scum. Can you clarify your stance on Mgm please when you get the time? It's not like you haven't posted content, but it doesn't read clearly to me.

[Patrick]

See I think that both mgm and Adele have acted pretty scummy, but I could see them as scumbuddies. They don't address each other much, or express any suspicion of each other, and Adele keeps slipping in small defences of MgM. Like in post 318, where she makes MgM's attack on Glork seem more reasonable by saying that she actually wasn't sure whether Glork was serious either. Post 444 disagrees with the mgm 'bandwagon' of one vote. And I still don't like the last line of post 477 which seemed like another way of not taking a side.

Thesp I could possibly see as being scum with those two, though I'm unsure whether all 3 scum would have hammered down on AndrewS yesterday. Thesp's suspicions today are fairly weak, and it feels like he's going mainly after lurkers/sideliners. If that is the case, I don't know quite why he hasn't found Adele suspicious, who seems to be playing a fairly classic scum game of avoiding controversy.

As for my reasons for suspecting MgM. The first paragraph you quoted from me was a fair summing up of my feeling on him day 1. I did say he had made some odd posts/not paid attention, but you're quite right, those are not very strong things, which is why I wasn't especially suspicious of him day 1. I confirmed that in the first line of my second paragraph. Today however is a different story. I immediately took a disliking to the defence he used when Glork accused him of fishing towards spectrumvoid's role. This is mainly his posts 37, 38 and 40. As I said in my long post, I have trouble seeing how a pro towner could think in that way. If you suspect someone is a powerole, it seems obvious that you don't ask them to claim. Mgm said that he didn't fancy trying to defend spectrumvoid because "with a deadline looming that's not really the best option". I call BS on this. He suggested she claim on 7th. The deadline was on the 13th. 6 days is ample time to defend someone, and bring about a change. I feel that he probably wanted the best of both worlds for scum: a claim out of her, then a lynch on AndrewS. As I also said in my long post, I didn't much like the vote on Glork from him in his 38th post, which felt both OMGUSy and oppotunistic given that Glork had already picked up some early suspicion at the start of the day.

The other thing I don't like, though it's not as severe, is the defence he's been using in his recent posts. He made a post which is slightly scummy, and when called out on it, he seems to being saying that because we can't prove that he was testing the waters with CDB, that means that it's irrelevant. Obviously I can't read his mind to know for certain, but that is a really craplogical defence I feel. If his defence was acceptable, you could surely apply it to anything someone does wrong. Like take what you just accused me of - You say that I'm trying to shuffle onto the mgm wagon without being noticed. It would stupid for me to say, "That means nothing because you can't prove whether I was trying to do that or not." It's not a game of certainties, and we go off how things come accross, feel, look etc.

So yeah, I could see Adele and mgm as scum together, with maybe Thesp too.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

See I think that both mgm and Adele have acted pretty scummy, but I could see them as scumbuddies.

Why the "but"?

[Patrick]

They are both scummy individually, but I could also see them as scumbuddies.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I see. I would think the first would support the second.

(If however you phrase it the other way around. "I see them as scumbuddies, but also as individually scummy." That does makes sense and I assume that's what you meant, then.)

[Mgm]

That's quite a strange sort of a defence. Obviously we don't know whether or not you were, but the wording and timing suggests it. This isn't a game of certainties.

My point was that Glork is assuming the worst with no evidence to back it up. I never tried to lynch CDB, so assuming that was my aim has no basis in either fact or logic.
Try Occam's Razor it works like a charm.

Bzzzt. Fail.

I am most certainly

not

naive enough to give you the benefit of the doubt,

ESPECIALLY

if I

already suspected you

for other reasons. And evidently, I am not alone in this most recent suspicion. In my eyes, you're guilty until proven innocent.

So you suspect me. I can live with it (we're playing a game of mafia after all). It's the assumption that asking for clarification about CDB is an attempt to lynch him which I don't like. You're painting me in a bad light (possibly with the aim to get people to vote me) based on an incorrect premise. Since you already suspect me, you should have enough material to build a case on less strenuous assumptions. CES worded it quite nicely: "That's a bad mindset as it leads to circular reasoning. The correct mindset is possibly guilty until proven otherwise." And just so you are entirely clear on my intentions;

Confirm vote: Glork

.

Patrick, there's a reason I haven't addressed Adele. I don't think she did or say anything worth addressing directly (that's not neccesarily a bad thing, it just means I can't find anything wrong with it). On the contrary, over the course of the game, I have agreed with Nightfall, Thesp and CES and probably more people I can't remember and commented on numerous things I thought were incorrect, misguided or wrong. It's just not possible to address every single player directly during the first one-and-a-half day of a game. I'll no doubt address Adele in the future if she does something scummy or says something particularly useful like CES did. She'll also get my attention if she tries to bandwagon someone today I don't think is a good candidate.

[Ether]

Hi. Overpriced British chocolate for everyone.

I'm basically aware of current events. I'm being nagged at this point to get to sleep, and the paragraphs here have been kind of blurring together even before that. I hate sinking to check-in posts...but, pfeh. Could this wait until what is technically later today? If Nightfall finishes his PBP, even better.

(Speaking of Nightfall, for those of you curious about my vote yesterday--I thought his post 403 was his big hyped-up post, and wasn't pleased. Eh.)

[Nightfall]

Okay.
I’ve read through everything that I have missed, and considering the amount that I missed that was a pretty big job. I will now do a PBPA on those that I have so far summarized the posts of. (These PBPA do not take into consideration any actions that have happened since I made the post summaries. I will comment on those soon.)

Adele
-Believed AndrewS' no lynch vote was against the towns best interest.

I agreed with her stance then, and I still do.

-Agreed that even if it was just to garner reactions it is scummy enough to recieve a vote.

I agreed with this too. I also did not see her voting Andrew as evidence of her being lynch happy as Andrew would later accuse her.

-Touches on Glork's hyper activity this game.

It might be because I have not played a game from the start with Glork in a long time, but I also noticed that he was more hyper and even a bit more eratic than he usually is in his games.

-Unvotes Andrew saying that the ends to his suposed point does not justify the means.

Adele appears to take Andrew’s “true intent” as being on the lvl and unvotes. I’m not sure how I feal on this move. She was the first one (?) to vote for Andrew for his no lynch proposal, but then leaves the wagon when Andrew made his less then convincing reveal of his real intents. It felt a little like she knew what would happen next.

-Joins the SV wagon because Zind is on it.

I don’t know why or how it started, but I’ve been in games with the two of them before and Adele following Zinds lead is not that uncommon. Adele joining the SV wagon seemed a little opertunistic while at the same time a way of dodging future blame for her vote if SV was a town lynch.

-Says that she wasnt completely sure if Glork was truthfull with his no lynch vote.

This I can believe, and almost agree with. When Glork made his original post, I was pretty sure he was kidding.. after his 2nd post I thought he was kidding, after his third post I thought he was kidding, after his fourth post I was a little confused.

ChannelDelibird
-Votes for Andrew for voting him over his username.
-Votes CES for wanting to …lynch progress?
-FOSes Andrew for his reasoning behind his no lynch suggestion.

Shows that he is against Andrew’s reasons for his no lynch vote, and FOSes him to make it clear.

-Asks Mgm if he prefers lurkers to people that post/talk too much.
-Says that Glork is acting like someone else this game and that he is being rather unhelpful. He also Votes Andrew for using the “If I was really scum I wouldn’t do that” comment.

Another person that feels that Glork is acting off of his normal game playing style. This and his (now) vote on Andrew over the WIFOM part of his play, are two things that I agree with.

-Corrects a vote count
-Apologizes for a lack of recent posting
- Agrees with IH that the random SV wagon is a bad idea

I agreed then, and I agree now.

-States that we should have all been voting Andrew a long time ago

I agree with this too.

A concern that I have with CDB’s play is that on one hand his views could be truthful, but on the other, they also appear to be the same as what is at the time the views of the majority. The SV wagon is the odd one out in this situation. A the same time desire to follow an SV wagon wasn’t held by that great of a majority.

CES
-Votes Thesp
-Asks Glork to vote Thesp
-Foses Glork for lying
-A few posts of negotiation between Glork and CES about the order they should lynch people.

The usual from CES

-FOSes Andrew
-Votes Andrew
-Mentions how he plays differently IRL than he does online
-Says that no lynching is bad for information flow.

Info from the days yes…

-Gives Andrew a small list of reasons why he would vote no lynch if he was scum.
-Says that he doesn’t see town doing what Andrew did.

Addresses the WIFOM part of Andrew’s argument

-A few jokes
-FOSes Patrick for “misrepresenting” Thesp
-Explains to Ether what part of Andrews “real reason for voting no lynch” is WIFOM

Again CES points out the questionable area of Andrew’s claim, but it falls upon deaf ears.

-Votes SV as part of the random wagon

I disagreed with this action

-FOSes IH and says that the wagon isn’t random.

Yes it is. It has been commented that some had doubts about SV’s alignment earlier on, but the wagon itself was randomly targeted. The only way the wagon could have not been random, would be if Glork had purposely targeted it towards SV

-FOSes CBird for agreeing with IH
-Votes Andrew claiming that SV’s claim is provable

Yes it is

-Makes a few comments promoting the idea of SV revealing the name of her vig target before we go into the night phase

For someone who just jumped off the wagon to give SV a chance at proving herself, it seems odd that he appears to be attempting to increase the difficulty for her to do so.

Ether
-Votes Buddylee
-Tells Glork his avatar is weird, and unvotes.
-Votes Andrew and claims that the whole idea of voting a no lynch right now confuses her.

Confuses? Regardless of the reason she is against it though

-(After Andrew gives his “real reason” for voting no lynch) Votes IH and says that she really doesn’t like the reaction Andrew is getting from other players.

If someone performs a scummy action I see no reason why they should not be called on it, nor a reason why they should not be held accountable for it.

-Says that a few reasons that people are voting Andrew are “bullshit” and “shrug”s them off. She also posts this : “The initial attack on AndrewS was that a no-lynch would hurt the town. It's been pointed out that a no-lynch wouldn't actually happen. So, yeah. The reason that scum would be more likely than town to vote no-lynch seems gone. Now what?” NOT understanding that this is a BIG WIFOM.

Ether appears to believe that Andrew’s own claim that scum would not promote a no lynch of being enough to show that he is not scum. Why is she so eager to take Andrew’s word and lash out against those that believe otherwise? She also doesn’t appear to clearly understand the idea of WIFOM.

-Posts “I haven't the slightest idea what's up with Mgm. I don't like him, but I like IH less.” Followed by a statement that she “loathe(s) the misrepresentative voters” for calling WIFOM on Andrew.

Again she shows confusion over the true WIFOM part of the situation. Ether also lashes out in some ways at other players. She has done this a few times with both Mgm and myself. I don’t know if this is scummy in itself, but it is worth noting.

-States that a real push for a no lynch is as unlikely as Andrew says it would be. She then rips into Mgm (“Mgm's posts give off a vibe of overwhelming stupid and I don't actually find them scummy.”) and calls Buddylee hypocritical for his comment “In other news, the Thesp-Glork axis gives me hives.”.

Again results to personal attacks, and displays her misunderstanding of why people are suspicious of Andrew.

Fritz
-Votes Thesp
-Says Andrew is not the play.
-Votes SV
-Works out a deal with CES to lynch Thesp and SV
-A few posts about “why isn’t scum dead yet” and why aren’t more people voting SV
-Says that if there is a second vig they should not kill anyone in order to reveal whether SV is mafia or not. He also votes Andrew.

Fritz’s last post is the only one I see of his to really contribute much of anything. For the record I agree with his comment though, and consider it more of a sign of townie than of scum.

On the topic of Fritz I must ask, why of all the talk about how I am “lurking” or “not bothering to post” and of how CDB is “attempting to make it look like he is contributing” why isn’t more attention being given to the fact that Fritz too has contributed very little?

Glork
-Votes Andrew
-Foses CES
-FOSes Fritz
-Foses Zind and CES
-Votes CES and Foses Zind and Pat
-Asks why he looks like scum
-Says that Andrew is looking like a good voting alternative
-Votes Andrew
-Votes CES

Up to this point Glork uncharacteristically appears to want to lynch everyone and everything.

-Claims that the town is so bandwagon.

He then claims that others are jumping onto people too much.

-“Guys we should No Lynch. Just sayin'.”
-“Honest answer? Depends on the game, the players, and how I feel at the time.”
-“EBWODP: But that suggestion of No-Lynch was totally serious, I assure you. , Unvote CES, FOS/IGMEOY: CES , Vote: No Lynch”
-“It gives us information from night actions!!”
-“But we're more likely to kill a townie that way! It's only Day One, and we have nothing to go on!!”

Makes multiple, not just one post about no lyncing.

-Votes Mgm for not paying attention.

I’ll double check this later.

-Says that hed kill everynight if he was vig

Again shows a bloodlust that I don’t typically associate with Glork and his style of play.

-“Alright, let's take an informal poll? Who here thinks I was *actually* serious about my No-Lynch suggestion?”

Posting it once can be considered an act of sarcasm, and of making a point. Posting it 4+ times can be seen as the same but with overkill

-“So what you're saying is that I, knowing that AndrewS picked up flak for voting No Lynch, and even participating in the ensuing bandwagon on him, decided to vote No-Lynch for some ulterior motive (presumably to push through this day without a lynch)?
Yeah. Right.”

I understand where Glork is coming from here but I believe he is not clear on Mgm’s reasoning for his somments

-Foses IH for telling Thesp that he has his on him.
-Votes Ether

Continues his aggressive play

-Says that by his experience scum are less likely to defend partners as opposed to townies.

This I agree with and will admit that up until he posted it I hadn’t really given it a great deal of thought. It made me more thoughtful of why Ether would appear to be defending Andrew.

-Says we should bandwagon whoever he rolls
-Rolls thesp and says we should roll again.
-Rolls SV and votes SV telling Thesp he made a good find.
-“In all seriousness, at this point, I think I'd be okay with an SV lynch.”
-Says that he doesn’t like pats comment that a short time until deadline means that we need to decide which vote leader to lynch.

This coming after he just started a new bandwagon by rolling a pair of dice? Pat’s reasoning to me seemed much more based on reason. On the surface at least.

-“I don't think AndrewS is particularly scummy. I don't even necessarily think that his wagoners were scum, as I would have been very surprised to see him actually get lynched based on the NL suggestion. Slap-on-the-wrist and an overall IGMEOY feeling is about what I expected. And, to be frank, that's more or less what happened.”

See next red comment

-Asks for Thesp’s opinion on SV’s coles notes versions of Andrews posts.
-Votes Andrew stating that SV’s claim is provable.

Vote = IGMEOY & Slap on the wrist?

-Votes Mgm.

I am going to go through Mgm’s posts again, but for now I don’t think he should be getting as much negativity as he has been getting…

_________________

I will go into more detail when I post again, but a lot of the recent posts seem to be on the topic of people lurking or posting as to appear to be helpful. I will re-ask my question from above since there seems to be an even larger number of callouts for people to post something of content… Why hasn’t Fritz been accused of flying under the radar, or of lurking in plain sight?


P.S. My readthrough and this post took a total of about 2 1/2 hours to accomplish, hopefully it is enough to show you all that I am still interested in this game and determined to help out and see it though. Tommorrow being Monday, I will once again be at work during the day, but I will do my best to contribute on anything new when I return home (roughly 24 hours from this point in time).

[Adele]

I swear that I posted yesterday, but that post's not here now, and I don't remember what I said

[Glork]

I swear that I posted yesterday, but that post's not here now, and I don't remember what I said

lawlscum

[Adele]

lawlscum

"lawl"? o...kay. And I especially like the "scum" bit. We'll be coming back to that later.

This is interesting. And very strange.

Glork thinks MGM, Thesp, Ether, Adele, possibly CDB are scummy.
Thesp finds CDB scummiest.
Adele supports Glork's suspicions of Ether (though I find it odd that she's not voting for anybody... any reason for the lack of a vote, Adele?)
CDB find Ether, Thesp, and Glork scummy.
MGM finds Glork, CDB scummy.
Ether is gone for a couple more days, but I think I remember her suspecting MGM yesterday.

Glork's really enjoying jumping on people (heck, see his last post for an example). He seems more wanting to find excuses for accusing people than trying to actually figure out who

is

scum.

Sometimes you'll see Adele correct people's logic without making a statement on whether or not they're scummy--it's more conversational.

Well, bad logic's like a hanging bracket...

I find myself agreeing with Glork and, even more, MBL. Thesp is setting off alarm-bells in my head, and so is Adele.

I don't agree with the Glorkwagon. I could be wrong, but Glork isn't setting off any alarm-bells with his play so far D2. In fact, I'd expect Town-Glork to up his game after a bad Day 1. I agree with MBL's observation that Thesp doesn't really seem to be trying to catch scum.

In that post, he says he doesn't trust me or Thesp. Then he says a bunch of other stuff, including several comments about Thesp, but none about me. Was I just stuck in there as an easy target? Actually, probably not, he probably thought it wasn't necessary since it's a reasonably common opinion that I'm shifty.

I'm watching Ether, Glork, and Patrick. Really like what Nightfall's just given us. I find it difficult to get a read on Zindaras because I like him so much (cats rule ok). CES is being CES-y; could be more helpful. Fritz needs some serious pokitude, Ether had better give us some useful stuff in the post she promised. I need to reread CDB to make my mind up about him, ditto Thesp.

finally,

See I think that both mgm and Adele have acted pretty scummy, but I could see them as scumbuddies. They don't address each other much, or express any suspicion of each other, and Adele keeps slipping in small defences of MgM. Like in post 318, where she makes MgM's attack on Glork seem more reasonable by saying that she actually wasn't sure whether Glork was serious either. Post 444 disagrees with the mgm 'bandwagon' of one vote. And I still don't like the last line of post 477 which seemed like another way of not taking a side.

I mentioned that I'd not been certain of Glork's seriousness because it was relevant that more then one person made the same mistake (at one point Glork expresses a similar sentiment). Post 444 I wanted to say that I'd oppose an mgm wagon today. There's been a lot of attention on him for what I've come to believe are not very good reasons.
For example:

Patrick wrote:
That's quite a strange sort of a defence. Obviously we don't know whether or not you were, but the wording and timing suggests it. This isn't a game of certainties.
My point was that Glork is assuming the worst with no evidence to back it up.

...something he's been doing a lot btw...

I never tried to lynch CDB, so assuming that was my aim has no basis in either fact or logic.
Try Occam's Razor it works like a charm.

So, ouch, yeah, he shouldn't be calling on Occam's Razor in mafia. That's a... logical error. (um, insert MBL's laughter here?)
But anyway. The question - did Mgm do anything directly or indirectly to contribute to a CDB lynch - is relevant. The fact that there are indirect tactics at play in Mafia's not the point - the question as to whether Glork can point to some indirect machinations or simply hallucinated this relationship

is

. At any rate, I trust Mgm at this time.

[Patrick]

Ok, to comment a bit on your post:

This is interesting. And very strange.

Glork thinks MGM, Thesp, Ether, Adele, possibly CDB are scummy.
Thesp finds CDB scummiest.
Adele supports Glork's suspicions of Ether (though I find it odd that she's not voting for anybody... any reason for the lack of a vote, Adele?)
CDB find Ether, Thesp, and Glork scummy.
MGM finds Glork, CDB scummy.
Ether is gone for a couple more days, but I think I remember her suspecting MGM yesterday.

Glork's really enjoying jumping on people (heck, see his last post for an example). He seems more wanting to find excuses for accusing people than trying to actually figure out who is scum.

I'm just wondering why you quoted that post by Glork when you made that assertion. He wasn't exactly jumping on ppl there, he gave his opinion on how the suspicions of various ppl interwine and how that leads him to believe that there might be one or two lurker scum.

So, ouch, yeah, he shouldn't be calling on Occam's Razor in mafia. That's a... logical error. (um, insert MBL's laughter here?)
But anyway. The question - did Mgm do anything directly or indirectly to contribute to a CDB lynch - is relevant. The fact that there are indirect tactics at play in Mafia's not the point - the question as to whether Glork can point to some indirect machinations or simply hallucinated this relationship is. At any rate, I trust Mgm at this time.

Now you're running this same defence for Mgm too. I find it hard to understand. Mgm made a post right. It put out some feelers for a possible CDB lynch, by seeing whether there would be some momentum in that direction. He committed himself to precisely nothing in that direction. So no, it hasn't really put CDB closer to a lynch, because he's not one of the biggest targets right now, but I'm not sure why that matters.

Incidentally, I'd like to know why you're suspicious of me, especially given that you've just critisised someone for not explaining his suspicions about you.