433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over

[Eletriar]

Fair enough; I just figured I had to say something, so I went on the only thing I had. It does annoy me that I lost the only thing I was going off of...

Mod edit

CURRENT AS OF POST 137!

Southpaw: 1 (thorgot)
gorckat:2 (eletriar superstring)
The fonz 1 (CES)

[superstring91]

thats ok, at least we know [somewhat] where you stand.
we still need gorkcat, though.
if i could put another vote on him, i would

[The Fonz]

I can understand annoyed, but it seems to be a general theme of his... Fonz, are you usually this defensive? Just wondering...

I only have the one completed game here, as scum (replacing in just before getting lynched) so I'm afraid I can't provide a track record either way. What I will say is that by placing that Southpaw vote as a kinda trap for opportunistic scum, I was inevitably setting myself up to countervote whoever attacked me, something that it's pretty hard to do without looking defensive. This was fine by me, since finding scum was more important than looking innocent.

I'd say Gorckat ought to be prodded

rather than voted, right now.

[pete d]

Hrmmm... I'm a little suspicious of superstring trying to get something going on Gorckat (not that I'm not a bit suspicious of the non-contributors, gorckat, thorgot in particular); it just seems to me like you're pushing it a bit hard. I agree with Fonzy (although i think he may be missing out rule number whatever it is, you know, the one about not mentioning... um... who was it again? i dont know, i think we weren't supposed to mention somebody in the thread. anyhow.). It would be nice to hear from gorckat though [/euphemism]. I'm buying Fonzy as town at the moment.

[Dasquian]

I agree that the pressure on gorckat doesn't mean much if he isn't here. I'd rather focus on the ones who are here but not adding anything useful.

Just so it didn't get missed in last page's Drama, thorgot - you seem to imply that we should be looking at pressuring The Fonz now, is that correct, and if so, why? Could you share your thoughts on how the game has gone so far?

[The Fonz]

Right, my thoughts on where we go from here:

For starters, I'm getting town vibes from Pete D. The bit about me 'accusing Dodgy of being overly defensive' was untrue, but it doesn't strike me as scummy- after all, why would scum lie in order to make Town look better? (Since he goes on to say that he thought that nonexistent attack was justified). So, genuine mistake. I guess this could come across as an OMGUR, but what the hell.

I think we've got a couple leads here:

Thorgot is ever so slightly scummy, for reasons that Pete has amply demonstrated, having not yet really voiced an opinion on anyone. His last post

was

a response to a direct question, but nonetheless, it's not like he couldn't have expanded on it if he wanted. There was nothing to stop him saying 'I think the bandwagon was justified, and Dodgy is probably scum' or 'I thought it was justified, but I think Fonz is reading too much into Dodgy's attack' or 'I thought it was justified, but I'm wary of how much Fonz/Superstring appear to be agreeing' or suchlike. I think he'd be a good target for a mini-wagon right now.

I'd still like to hear a justification of the 'lynch -4 is scummy' argument from Sweenytodd- just because it now appears that Dodgy genuinely held that opinion, doesn't make it correct, so I'd like to hear based on what reasoning ST supported him.

A bit of game theory, if I may- I think, given that Dodgy's replacement will be basically confirmed town, (s)he ought to be given the responsibility of hammering, and anyone else hammering ought to be quicklynched tomorrow. If we have a definite town hammer (and I don't think any other town player would be dumb enough to do it if this plan were agreed on, which of course also makes it too difficult for scum) then we can ensure time for a claim, narrow down the number of suspicious voters, and give anyone going to lynch-1 a right going over. Thoughts?

[Thestatusquo]

This is the first and only warning. I stated explicitly in the rules that communicating with the mod is not allowed in thread. Next time, PM me, fonz.

[The Fonz]

Since for some reason TSQ felt the need to delete this, I will repeat: I feel using votes to pressure someone who hasn't posted in a week is

futile

, it's a better idea that someone request a prod (yes, by PM) and we keep our attention on those who are here. If nothing else, it will give lurkers/replacements more to go on when they get here.

[The Fonz]

EBWODP: AH, he actually didn't delete that, it was in a post further up.

[Thestatusquo]

Just a note: Gorckat was prodded yesterday before any of this was even an issue.

[Thestatusquo]

Dodgy is replaced by Cogito Ergo Sum

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Dodgy sucks.

*reads thread*

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Okay, I'm retracting Dodgy's claim.

Objectively, he probably claimed to help the scum nail the doctor at night.

I need a Vote Count.

Also, I found Dasquian's fourth vote quite pro-town. It's a move that helps the town yet draws suspicion.

[thorgot]

Okay, I'm retracting Dodgy's claim.

Objectively, he probably claimed to help the scum nail the doctor at night.

I need a Vote Count.

Also, I found Dasquian's fourth vote quite pro-town. It's a move that helps the town yet draws suspicion.

Isn't something that draws suspicion to a town player inherently anti-town?

[superstring91]

Hrmmm... I'm a little suspicious of superstring trying to get something going on Gorckat (not that I'm not a bit suspicious of the non-contributors, gorckat, thorgot in particular); it just seems to me like you're pushing it a bit hard. I agree with Fonzy (although i think he may be missing out rule number whatever it is, you know, the one about not mentioning... um... who was it again? i dont know, i think we weren't supposed to mention somebody in the thread. anyhow.). It would be nice to hear from gorckat though [/euphemism]. I'm buying Fonzy as town at the moment.

i realize that it doesn't mean much if he's not here, but if he has been reading, and not posting, then it does.

and yes, i am trying to get something going on gorkcat. im trying to get pressure on him. it was either him or thorgot. and i'll probably go for thorgot next.

all i'm trying to do with my votes right now is pressure. im not trying to get anyone lynched [yet]

[superstring91]

Okay, I'm retracting Dodgy's claim.

Objectively, he probably claimed to help the scum nail the doctor at night.

I need a Vote Count.

Also, I found Dasquian's fourth vote quite pro-town. It's a move that helps the town yet draws suspicion.

Isn't something that draws suspicion to a town player inherently anti-town?

not necesarilly. hammering draws attention, but in the end it is a good thing

[Sweenytodd]

Ok guys... I apologize about my recent lack of posting, i have had connectivity issues which I recently resolved. In response to

I'd still like to hear a justification of the 'lynch -4 is scummy' argument from Sweenytodd- just because it now appears that Dodgy genuinely held that opinion, doesn't make it correct, so I'd like to hear based on what reasoning ST supported him.

It was the L -3 vote by Dasquien that caught my eye, not the L-4 which preceded it. As an admited noob I was hoping to procede cautiously, it may not be the best course to spark discussion, but well I guess Dodgy took care of that. I mean, whoa.. that is a meltdown the likes of which I haven't seen.

In re-reading,

My current feeling is that, actually, with Eletriar getting a little edgy when Southpaw went to two votes, and Dodgy doing similar when he went to four, there might be something in what was essentially a completely random bandwagon. Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting.

stuck out at me. It seems that post #40 is a bit premature to be linking pairs of people for not hopping onto a bandwagon.

Also to the Fonz,

I think, given that Dodgy's replacement will be basically confirmed town

I didn't see the connection, was there some proof given to Dodgy's claim or is this a WIFOM mafia wouldn't do what he did kind of thing? I just re-read this section so please point me to where you got that because i missed it.

[pete d]

(Though my 'outstanding defensiveness?' Pot, kettle...)

I guess I remembered this part, and sort of glazed over the bit where you talked about overreacting / accidently fused together the concepts of overreacting and defensiveness in my mind. Or it could have been because I thought he was being defensive. Anyhow. Sorry 'bout that.

[The Fonz]

Ok guys... I apologize about my recent lack of posting, i have had connectivity issues which I recently resolved. In response to

I'd still like to hear a justification of the 'lynch -4 is scummy' argument from Sweenytodd- just because it now appears that Dodgy genuinely held that opinion, doesn't make it correct, so I'd like to hear based on what reasoning ST supported him.

It was the L -3 vote by Dasquien that caught my eye, not the L-4 which preceded it. As an admited noob I was hoping to procede cautiously, it may not be the best course to spark discussion, but well I guess Dodgy took care of that. I mean, whoa.. that is a meltdown the likes of which I haven't seen.

Your initial response was this:

I have to agree with Dodgy on this one, while promoting discussion at this point is what we need to do, liberal use of the

FOS

would be my preference to willy-nilly bandwagonning, especially to put someone halfway to lynch before we have had any kind of discussion at all seems reckless. Though I see him in no danger I am also going to remove my random vote

Unvote: Superstring91

until we have more discussion.

You said you thought it was reckless, yet that you thought southpaw was in no danger. If it's not dangerous, how is it reckless? Oh look, Dasquian just recklessly put someone who might be town in no danger whatsoever!

It also seems now that your position was subtly different from Dodgy's, yet you didn't bother stating that initially. You're also in the not insignificant group who haven't really expressed a suspicion yet- see your 'apart from that fourth vote, there's nothing really to go on' comment. If that fourth vote was the only thing you had to go on, why didn't you, well, go on it?

In re-reading,

My current feeling is that, actually, with Eletriar getting a little edgy when Southpaw went to two votes, and Dodgy doing similar when he went to four, there might be something in what was essentially a completely random bandwagon. Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting.

stuck out at me. It seems that post #40 is a bit premature to be linking pairs of people for not hopping onto a bandwagon.

He wasn't linking people. He was expressing suspicion of both. It's not that different from your post 37 at all, apart from in finding a different thing scummy.

Also to the Fonz,

I think, given that Dodgy's replacement will be basically confirmed town

I didn't see the connection, was there some proof given to Dodgy's claim or is this a WIFOM mafia wouldn't do what he did kind of thing? I just re-read this section so please point me to where you got that because i missed it.

I couldn't see, at the time, why a scummer would claim doc there as a tactic. Plus, he'd been strongly hinting powerrole in the previous three or four posts. Now that CES has retracted Dodgy's claim, I don't know what to think, so that suggestion is withdrawn.

[Southpaw]

So far we've been stuck on an argument regarding whether or not someone should get defensive based on four quick badwagon votes.

However, even if no one should be concerned about the four votes, I don't really see how it is particulary suspicious. Mafia would love a quick day 1, so I can't see why they would want to put the spotlight on themselves to defend someone who may be close to getting lynched.

[Dasquian]

Vote: thorgot

I've posted very clear direct questions to him (109, 129), and he's flat-out ignored them (138). Moreover, what he has posted all game has been of very little substance and I submit that he's lurking like a good'un.

In response to Sweenytodd; I was just noting that an entirely arbitrary bandwagon on Southpaw drew early defensiveness from both Eletriar, then Dodgy. It stuck out as me as worthy of note, so I noted it (as I said at the time: "Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting"). I certainly wouldn't act on it as a link unless one of those guys showed up as scum.

[thorgot]

Vote: thorgot

I've posted very clear direct questions to him (109, 129), and he's flat-out ignored them (138). Moreover, what he has posted all game has been of very little substance and I submit that he's lurking like a good'un.

This may seem suspicious, but I honestly didn't see your questions.

To answer them:

I was sort of joking when I said Dodgy's conversation with Fonz made me suspicious of Fonz. In my opinion, it signifies nothing. This is the first day. For all we know, both Fonz and Dodgy are scum, messing with us. It's just too early to say.

[Dasquian]

OK, next question: who do you find suspicious, and why? A lot's happened, and you haven't said much (and still aren't).

[thorgot]

OK, next question: who do you find suspicious, and why? A lot's happened, and you haven't said much (and still aren't).

Sure.

CES isn't very suspicious, but he did retract a doctor claim, and being "definitely town" is a death warrant.

The Fonz, for attacking Dodgy, isn't very suspicious to me, because he is drawing too much attention.

Gorckat isn't very suspicious to me, because he is so inactive.

Dasquian, I find you somewhat suspicious, because you are that perfect level between Gorckat and The Fonz, being active and helpful but not offending anybody.

[Eletriar]

EBWODP: AH, he actually didn't delete that, it was in a post further up.

Um, not to be annoying, but could you clarify what 'EBWODP' means? I've not heard that one before.