Mafia v. Wolves Redux: Finally Over!

[Wizardcat]

That was an unvote, not a vote. And, it was because that was a random vote from earlier.

[TBuG]

I'm getting more tired of OTU. He didn't readdress my correction. He's ignoring me now.

[remussaidow]

oh. My mistake. I thought it was an unvote revote.

[Zindaras]

Hi.

I'll reread sometime the coming week.

[Phoebus]

Vote count:

1 al4xz (Kison)
1 Battle Mage (~N9V~)
1 Kison (Akbar)

9 OverTheUnder (al4xz, Battle Mage, DrippingGoofball, Fuldu, Mastermind of Sin, Mr Flay, PBuG, remussaidow, Raffles)

1 Raffles (Scarecrow)

8 not voting

11 to lynch

Deadline imminent.

[XReyoX]

Deadline imminent

.

OMG

[Raffles]

Does that mean you are going to place one soon, or the deadline is set already and I'm oblivious about it?

[XReyoX]

I still haven't made up my mind. I need more time T_T. Mod is evil.

[Kison]

Does that mean you are going to place one soon, or the deadline is set already and I'm oblivious about it?

Imminent means that it's likely to occur at any moment.

[Fuldu]

OverTheUnder,

Now would be a good time to convince us not to lynch you, because as things stand, you have more than sufficient votes for a deadline lynch. If you have someone you feel you can make a case against, now would be the time to do it. Alternatively, if you're just going to claim, now would be the time to do it. The longer you wait, the less likely it is that we will be able to adequately respond to whatever defense you put forth.

[Raffles]

That could still be taken the either way, but I take it it's the first.

[Fuldu]

Does that mean you are going to place one soon, or the deadline is set already and I'm oblivious about it?

Imminent means that it's likely to occur at any moment.

Thanks, Kison. Raffles' question is still a reasonable one, in that he's asking whether the placement of a deadline is imminent or whether there's already a deadline in place that is imminent. As far as I can tell, it's the former.

[XReyoX]

If we don't get 11 votes by the deadline, does it mean it'll be a no-lynch day or the one with most votes will die?

[Raffles]

Usually no lynch, but I just discovered some mods do things differently, so we shall wait and see.

[DrippingGoofball]

8 people not voting? That's a lot.

[Raffles]

I think a macine gun prodding is in order.

[Zindaras]

I think a machine gun is in order.

Fixed.

I haven't started my reread yet, no, but I saw a funny so I swooped in to make it.

[Akbar]

I agree with Fuldu.

@OverTheUnder, Please claim now.

[Fuldu]

If we don't get 11 votes by the deadline, does it mean it'll be a no-lynch day or the one with most votes will die?

Read the rules, people. Not just here and now, but in all games. It's not complicated, and it saves you from asking stupid questions. Or, so I don't look like I'm picking on just one person, giving stupid answers to those questions.

I agree with Fuldu.

@OverTheUnder, Please claim now.

An interesting reading of what I said. I had thought I had made it fairly clear that claiming was relatively low on my list of preferred responses. I'd much rather see OTU convince us that he's not scum or that somebody else is than see him claim.

FOS: Akbar

for suggesting a non-ideal plan and making it look like it was my idea.

[al4xz]

OK, so it's true that I've not contributed anything, nor have I done much for the town but listened. OK, call me a lurker.

Now, I'd like to see OTU post some reasoning. However, I want him to explain himself before we either move on or kill him. So,

Unvote: OTU

Scum:
OTU: Reasons are known. Aggressive. Not really explaining himself except shooting back responses.
Kison: FOS, nothing else. I've read back, and I've reached the point of believing you are scum. FOS only.

Neutral: Everyone else. I don't trust anyone to be townie ATM.

~Alex~

[Akbar]

@Fuldu
Actually, if OTU is a special role, the "ideal" plan to prevent a mislynch would be claiming, regarless if that's what you suggested or not. Only scum would persue a lynch on a potential power role with other canidates available.

Secondly, you tell him to present a defense for himself, as if he hasn't tried that already.

Third, you tell him to make a case against who he thought was scum. Are you skimming the thread? Did you miss this?

Okay sorry for the delay I was extremely busy yesterday. I wrote this sorta quick so don't blame me for the bad grammar. :'(

My list for Scum/Neutral/Pro-Town

Scum - BattleMage, didn't give a reason for voting me but then to go on and say "I voted him for no reason" DURING the Random Voting stage. Also he never answered the question of why he voted me. Reyo, has contradicted himself by saying "I was focused on the OTU vote" but it doesn't seem that way because he isn't even voting for me. Also by his way of saying "raffles doesn't need to give an explanation" and also by voting erratically.~n9v~ voted for someone without a plausible reason and hasn't posted again or posted any of his thoughts about anyone else. al4xz, voted me for no reason other then I'm aggressive that's JUST as bad as voting for no reason. Seems like a scum jumping onto the wagon just as it's about to lynch someone. This plus his "we need more active people" when he himself hasn't contributed hardly anything to this game and neither has he been active. PBug, has a argument against me that doesn't even make sense. Just seems like he's hopping on the wagon at the end with a crappy reason to vote for me.

Neutral - Raffles, doesn't look real scummy but did sorta throw me off with the L-6 argument seeing as how it's so WIFOM-y. Akbar, has asked some good questions and has contributed to the game some doesn't seem real scummy imo.Remuissadow - He's been active has asked good questions and seems like he's reading/understanding the game hasn't done much to seem scummy. Except for the "only scum use arguments over and over again theory." Theoper raised some good points and has contributed some so he's in my neutral for right now, same with ScareCrow.

Pro-Town - Kison, took me a bit to understand when he posted the "nuisance" thing but after I understand that he seemed to be more likely town. I also have to agree with his point of spamming "End story" it does make someone look deseperate to end the discussion. Mr. Flay has also asked some good questions and followed up on them but then to pull the "lurking argument" on me when Battle mage, and others have did the same thing seemed to be like he was singling me out. I'd like to hear more about his vote for me. Mastermind of Sin - Looks town asked some good questions just doesn't seem real scummy. Remuissadow - He's been active has asked good questions and seems like he's reading/understanding the game hasn't done much to seem scummy.


Unknown - DFG : All he said was "Vote OverTheUnder" so I'd like a bit more explanation from her before I decide where I stand with her position. CDB, WizardCat, Der Hammer, Fuldu, Bird haven't really contributed much so I can't get a good tell on them.

The interesting part is you FOSing me for disagreeing with your strategy. That's fairly pompous don't you think?

[Fuldu]

Claiming is almost never preferable to talking your way out of a lynch without claiming. And given that claiming is always a viable backup strategy, I'd prefer he start sooner rather than later, which I believe is what my post was trying to indicate. But talking his way out of a lynch on the basis of sentence-long accusations leveled at five different players isn't going to be nearly as effective as picking one or two of them and laying out the specifics of scummy behavior in detail. Nothing OTU said in that post made me any more likely to vote for anyone else, but that doesn't mean that he couldn't develop an argument that would. It's just that nothing in the post you quoted looks much like an argument to me.

[Mr. Flay]

al4xz: Vote please. I want to see you commit to something, so we have something to go on tomorrow.

Anyone else who hasn't voted today: Same deal. Lurking is one thing, but making yourself totally unreadable is NOT pro-town.

[OverTheUnder]

Except a more detailed post in a bit from me while I go back and re-read certain people, I'll also vote then. Anyhow to response to Al4xz an FoS on someone giving no basis other then "I think he's scummy" giving no reasons for your basis of thinking isn't good. Also being aggressive isn't always a mafia tactic there are many different reasons a person could be aggressive.

[OverTheUnder]

My main suspects right now is #1. N9V one, for a vote for 0 reason after the random voting stage, and two for posting when he saw his name but not contributing anything and then disappearing again. I also didn't like him telling me "not to suspect him" because he didn't vote for me did he expect me to turn a blind eye to his actions? My second suspect is PBUg, one reason is because he said he would simply OMGUS vote me because I suspected him. So because I "suspect" you, you'll just vote for me back with no other reason then "You're voting for me."
Also when I noted his error he was quick to fire back a response stating a word change instead of saying after his post EBWOP. If I can come up with anything else I will, but I'm still sorta hesitant to claim.