Mini 473: Urban Dead Mafia! Barhah! (Over)

[Hjallti]

A pro-town Vig wouldn't have killed Gator or would he? Assuming that the morning scenes are genuine it ain't the zombies that killed Gator.

I thought during twilight that GatorGuy was he was scum for his quicklynch while there were open questions, that were useful when answered before we knew the alignment of darko, but useless afterwards.
But the lynching scene proved otherwise. Why would a Vig kill a player that has done something protown? I do think the Vig would have targetted possible scum.

[Claus]

A pro-town Vig wouldn't have killed Gator or would he? Assuming that the morning scenes are genuine it ain't the zombies that killed Gator.

I don't know. We don't need to suppose the Vig/NK to be bright. I can see a hasty vig/NK to see Gator as scum. Anyway, isn't NK strategy supposed to be to hunt equally scum and town, since they can be endgamed?

Nevertheless, the random N0 nightkill is what hints NKish to me.

[Claus]

Whops... I meant SK when I wrote NK. Urgh.

[Albert B. Rampage]

A better case ? What BS!

Picking up prod... it's gotten quiet here. I'd like to know what everyone thinks about Darko's and my relationship.. I expected more after Albert's post on me.

Even camisade is confused as to why he isn't bandwagoned. For f***'s sake, could you even make a counter analysis ?

[Claus]

Well, if you are not going to bother making a counter analysis on Zodiac... :-/

I've read both cases, and I prefer the one I am right now. If all you got to say about it is "What BS!" I guess I'm keeping my vote.

[pulsewidth]

Picking up the prod. Sorry bout that guys. I'm disappointed to see camisade hasn't answered my question yet. In fact, he seems to be doing the exact same thing that he was doing before the darko lynch: just hanging around waiting for something to happen. Aside from his weird vote on Hjallti early in the game, I don't really see where he has actively scumhunted. He's just kind of.. there. Lurking in plain sight generally isn't a good thing. camisade, in addition to my previous question, I want to get your thoughts on Zodiac.

ABR, you seem pretty deadset on your vote for camisade. Please explain why you aren't liking the wagon on Zodiac.

Claus, I want a better explanation as to why you think Zodiac is in one of the scum groups.

Zodiac, you seem to be pretty quiet about all of this. As of right now, you are due to be lynched. Why aren't you defending yourself?

[Albert B. Rampage]

Because unless we are under the threat of a no-lynch, I am keeping my vote on the scummiest player alive in this game.

[Smashy]

Right, forgot to mention this: pulsewidth and camisade were prodded roughly 8 hours ago. I just never posted that I had done so.

[Claus]

Picking up the prod. Sorry bout that guys. I'm disappointed to see camisade hasn't answered my question yet. In fact, he seems to be doing the exact same thing that he was doing before the darko lynch: just hanging around waiting for something to happen. Aside from his weird vote on Hjallti early in the game, I don't really see where he has actively scumhunted. He's just kind of.. there. Lurking in plain sight generally isn't a good thing. camisade, in addition to my previous question, I want to get your thoughts on Zodiac.

Claus, I want a better explanation as to why you think Zodiac is in one of the scum groups.

Original reasons for the vote:
1- Not contributing to the game
1.5- opportunistic jump into Darko bandwagon.
2- Only contribution seems to be OMGUS hjallti, in a way that bothers me.

Then, Zodiac suddenly posts the "what if we have a vig?"
3- Seems like he is hinting at being the vig. I don't think the two extra night kills we
had are vig kills.

All in all, it seems to me that your accusations of Camisade are similar to mine on Zodiac. Lurking, not scumhunting, etc. I can see the possibility that both Camisade could be a Zed, and Zodiac the PK (SK).

I'm ambivalent. Zodiac's and Albert's attitudes make me prefer the Zodiac Lynch.
That said, you are right that camisade does need to scumhunt more actively, instead of just showing amusement that people are not commenting on him very much.

[Claus]

Re-reading the last few pages.

If Albert is scum, Zodiac might very well be scum as well (In this direction of the implication), I think: Albert posted when Zodiac was at L-1 and didn't hammer. I know you can WIFOM away this argument, but I think the gain for scum if Zodiac is no scum and Albert is scum from that hammer is much bigger than the WIFOM gain (If Zodiac get killed and is no scum, then Albert seems to be no scum). Any thoughts about this? This of course is only a thought to keep in mind after Zodiac turns out to be no scum.

I REALLY don't like this. You should be more upfront in saying that "If Zodiac is scum, albert is scum for defending him". I don't believe that thesis. Albert-scum bussed darko in cold blood, and would certainly do it again.

His -1 post is consistent to his previous comment of "I'm not feeling the Zodiac Bandwagon".

[Albert B. Rampage]

Original reasons for the vote:
1- Not contributing to the game
1.5- opportunistic jump into Darko bandwagon.
2- Only contribution seems to be OMGUS hjallti, in a way that bothers me.

Then, Zodiac suddenly posts the "what if we have a vig?"
3- Seems like he is hinting at being the vig. I don't think the two extra night kills we
had are vig kills.

Like you said the reasons on both of them are similar except the links darko had with camisade. Maybe I'm just seeing something you're not.

Also, 1.5, isn't that a

good

thing ? And 3 seems more noobie than anything.

[Claus]

Albert, you ARE seeing something I'm not. I'm trying to decide if that something is really there or not. Specifically, the links darko has with camisade.

About Zodiac.

1.5 is a good thing in retrospect. But he gave no reason for his vote. 6 people were in the wagon, and we should have 4 reds (3 mafia + SK). 10 people were alive day one. Unless you believe all remaining three reds were out of the wagon (and you don't seem to), then we have at least one red voting.

The alternative to Zodiac is that either you, or me, or poppinpuffin is the "bussing" red.

And Zodiac is not a newbie. His join date is 2006, and he has quite a few games under his belt. One thing counting for him is that he does seems to be the silent kind, at least in the few games that I've read. I have not read enough to make a decision on that, though.

[Smashy]

Deadline's off for the moment, as I'm searching for a replacement for camisade. But it's going to be back on really quickly if activity doesn't pick up soon.

[Smashy]

*blink* Any of you guys going to bother to post? Anyways...

d3sisted replaces camisade.

I'll give him a couple of days to get up to speed, then there will be a deadline.

[d3sisted]

Yay, Urban Dead!

I'm just wondering, how many people here actually play UD?

[Claus]

*raises hand*

[d3sisted]

It's Hjallti. Lynch her ass.

[d3sisted]

Look back on Page 7. I still consider Hjallti making an avid attempt to defend rather than an attempt to delay the lynch as she claimed.

A METRIC FUCKTON OF MEANINGLESS BULLSHIT

After this post, Hjallti still tries to "explain" to him. Given what Darko says in his post, it's a wonder why anyone would still want this guy around.

Personally, I believe that nothing is ever random (except for the, yenno, random stage). Hence, I’m looking into why Oman in particular got targeted last night. He made 2 votes in total: one on camisade and one on Darko. Now, as it so happens, I have

undisputable

insider information confirming camisade’s allegiance to town, proof that is impossible to disclose of due to its secretive nature (Translation: Rule 5 says I can’t quote PMs). Anyway, my point is he wasn't targeted for angering a scum by voting. However, he does have a bit of a back-and-forth with Hjallti, on pages 6 and 7, which follows with my theory.

Vote: Hjallti

The next on my list is pulsewidth and clause, but that’s just a gut feeling so I’m not going to act on that until I get some concrete evidence.

As far as Urban Dead goes, there are only a select few (the Cops) who start out with guns, so I’m guessing we have a vig. An SK just wouldn’t fit in the theme very well, but I don’t know how far the host went in terms of adaptation.

As a side note, I lol’d at Albert’s 190

[Hjallti]

After this post, Hjallti still tries to "explain" to him. Given what Darko says in his post, it's a wonder why anyone would still want this guy around.

I made my defense and I know you either believe it or you don't. Please, note at least I defended him before we all came to know that he was scum, it is easy in hindsight to say it was very bad play (as town) or extremely bad play (as scum), but I just saw before town players loosing games for town in the same moronic style as darko showed and I thought it was happening again.

Funny how I am under attack from the two that are being attacked right now.

I was already considering Alberts' case against you. And I hope in this game you are standing as a (wo)man to show up against the case, rather than dodging it again, with some strange theory that you can't be suspected if you replace someone people suspect.

[d3sisted]

I am well aware of your defense, and, as you say, I have chosen not to believe it. Though I will still try to allay your suspicions of me in an attempt to undertake the immensely formidable task of answering the cases brought up against me, I ask you sympathize with me for it is not even remotely easy to step into the role of a highly suspected player.

Looking closely, it looks to me like its camisade who was the absent one. He certainly discouraged darko acting suspiciously, yet never placed a vote or a FoS. He has continuously offered darko opportunities to redeem himself instead of going down that path, as in:

I, too, am perplexed as to why camisade would neglect a vote or even so much as an FoS on he player he clearly suspected as scum. I think the most likely reason is that he tried to address one of the major flaws in Darko’s play style, the reason for which he was getting voted, and that is Darko’s defiance to contribute meaningful discussion. Valiant effort, but nonetheless frugal.

This is a blatant contradiction. camisade says that being really defensive is a scum-tell. Then he says darko's post seems really defensive. And he concludes from these two perspectives that darko shouldn't be voted. He uses logical fallacies to shroud his position in uncertainty, but he made a few mistakes in the process.

What he may have been trying to say was that Darko’s argument summed up to "I'm useless so don’t vote me!" which was indeed scummy because of the defensiveness, but camisade was still not ready to vote him. I admit, this is a bit of a stretch, and if it weren’t for the fact that I know for sure camisade is townie, I would be siding with Albert right now.

Attacking camisade, of which is probably early distancing.

You stated earlier that you found it suspicious of camisade that he did not vote Darko despite his suspicions of him. But now, when Darko does vote for camisade, you call it distancing? So no vote = scummy, and vote = distancing = scummy. Is there not a bit of a double standard here? Their vote doesn’t actually affect your suspicion of them, you are already in a mindset that camisade is scummy, and will accept no less than that. Dare I say that you are going as far as to twist details to support your case?

Protecting camisade. He implies I shouldn't add coal to the fire, aka only him and another may attack darko, imo.

Negative. He was accusing you of bandwagoning (adding coal to) camisade without original reasons other than the one puffin gave. Take a look at Darko’s 65:

I don't get why poppinpuffin or Albert B. Rampage don't bother to vote for camisade if you're going to criticize him.

Clearly, he is encouraging you and poppinpuffin to place a vote on camisade; I think we can agree that that is by no means 'protective'.

Attacking camisade again, but coyly states that he "requires pressure" instead of a more direct confrontation. At this point I believe darko is on really slippery grounds.

Ok. So when Darko protects camisade, he’s scummy. When he attacks him, he’s also scummy. BTW, I’m pretty sure that entire post by Darko was meant to mock you. And what kind of "direct confrontation" do you want? If you want camisade to talk, it’s quite necessary to apply a certain amount of pressure (which you also did not hesitate to do 3 posts back).

And now, the final coup de grace. Protecting camisade, attacking the attacker of camisade. He probably thought this was a smart thing to do.

He only said he liked camisade because of this:

And now I'll Unvote. I don't think anyone's behavior after that was very scummy after that, so I'm not going to vote for now.

Naturally, Darko is going to like anyone who doesn’t suspect him, and vice versa (hence his vote on you) seeing as he is scum.

Then again getting concerned when his scumbuddy gets some votes:

He only says this because Oman joined the camisade wagon. To me, he is just getting hopeful at the prospect of a townie lynch, because none of the other wagons he got on passed 2 votes. Notice, if he gets any sort of confirmation that the wagon is indeed gaining momentum, he can jump right back onto it, riding it to a mislynch.

This is starting to get obvious. While darko has consistently defended Hjallti, and consistently attacked me, he has been very shifty in regards to camisade. I see a strong tie between these two right now.

Since Darko ahs been consistently defending Hjallti and attacking you, it must also follow that Hjallti is a scum buddy. Correct?

Camisade : Lurkish.

Inactive. Not lurkish. Hence the need for a replacement.

Voted Hjalltii out of the blue to "draw discussion", but didn't come up with any conclusions from her "test" - could be distancing.

He never said it was a test. His aim was to spark discussion by enticing others to comment on his rash voting. Under this light, he clearly succeeded in his endeavour.

Tries to throw mud on Oman via Darko, like Hjallti is doing.

Excuse me,

how

do you actually "throw mud" on someone

through

someone else? Especially when the intermediary is a scum? Furthermore,

how

does camisade even come

close

to throwing suspicion on oman?

But then berates pulswidth for berating me on my Hjallti vote.

Like camisade said, he suspects Hjallti is suspicious for distancing from Darko. In other words, he agrees with your take on Hjallti. If pulswidth tries to berate you for suspecting Hjallti, naturally camisade would come to the defense because his own opinions are being assaulted as well.

Otherwise lurkish on D1, assumes a very weak anti-lynch position.

And doesn’t it make sense that scum would be pro-lynch, i.e.

trying

to lynch?

Regarding Albert's vote, Darko's attack on him does not look like distancing for me. I was actually giving town points for Camisade due to that attack.

Thank you for being the first to acknowledge this.

camisade, I'm still not liking your explanation for that weird vote on Hjallti early in the game. You said that the reason you voted was to provoke discussion, and then unvoted because it wasn't generating very much discussion..

What he actually said was this: "My reason for posting this was to draw up discussion, considering this game was basically at a standstill and

it worked a little at least.

And now I'll Unvote." I think I’ll let you guys decide whether that bore any resemblance at all to what pulsewidth was insinuating.

…AND because Hjallti wasn't responding. But Hjallti posted a couple of days before that he would be on very sparingly over the next 10 days, so why would you expect responses from him? If your goal was to generate discussion, why not put a vote on someone who was being more active?

"Why should I have kept my vote? Its not like it was making Hjalti say anything." He saw no reason to keep the vote on Hjallti because (1) he did not suspect her and (2) she was not responding to the pressure anyway. Note, the intent of camisade’s vote on Hjallti was not to provoke response from her, but to provoke response from

everyone else

in the thread.


There, those are the cases brought up from Albert, claus, and pulsewidth. If you have any more questions on camisade, throw them right at me, and I’ll try my best to clarify for you.

[Claus]

I have a few comments. I'll read an comment with more detail in the weekend.

1- "SK wouldn't fit the theme very well" is untrue. UD is know for the large number of Player Killers. Mind you, both SK and Vig are theme-possible, but I find Vig unlikely given the N0 nightkill.

2- Please name your quotes, or at least group them. It got difficult to remember whose quote was which from what you put on the thread.

[Claus]

EBWoP:

I'll write a reply with more details in the weekend.

[poppinpuffin]

COLLEGE MOVE IN DAY!
will post when I have my new computer.

[d3sisted]

MODEDT: Bombing that massive doublepost. Move along.

Looking closely, it looks to me like its camisade who was the absent one. He certainly discouraged darko acting suspiciously, yet never placed a vote or a FoS. He has continuously offered darko opportunities to redeem himself instead of going down that path, as in:

I, too, am perplexed as to why camisade would neglect a vote or even so much as an FoS on he player he clearly suspected as scum. I think the most likely reason is that he tried to address one of the major flaws in Darko’s play style, the reason for which he was getting voted, and that is Darko’s defiance to contribute meaningful discussion. Valiant effort, but nonetheless frugal.

This is a blatant contradiction. camisade says that being really defensive is a scum-tell. Then he says darko's post seems really defensive. And he concludes from these two perspectives that darko shouldn't be voted. He uses logical fallacies to shroud his position in uncertainty, but he made a few mistakes in the process.

What he may have been trying to say was that Darko’s argument summed up to "I'm useless so don’t vote me!" which was indeed scummy because of the defensiveness, but camisade was still not ready to vote him. I admit, this is a bit of a stretch, and if it weren’t for the fact that I know for sure camisade is townie, I would be siding with Albert right now.

Attacking camisade, of which is probably early distancing.

You stated earlier that you found it suspicious of camisade that he did not vote Darko despite his suspicions of him. But now, when Darko does vote for camisade, you call it distancing? So no vote = scummy, and vote = distancing = scummy. Is there not a bit of a double standard here? Their vote doesn’t actually affect your suspicion of them, you are already in a mindset that camisade is scummy, and will accept no less than that. Dare I say that you are going as far as to twist details to support your case?

Protecting camisade. He implies I shouldn't add coal to the fire, aka only him and another may attack darko, imo.

Negative. He was accusing you of bandwagoning (adding coal to) camisade without original reasons other than the one puffin gave. Take a look at Darko’s 65:

I don't get why poppinpuffin or Albert B. Rampage don't bother to vote for camisade if you're going to criticize him.

Clearly, he is encouraging you and poppinpuffin to place a vote on camisade; I think we can agree that that is by no means 'protective'.

Attacking camisade again, but coyly states that he "requires pressure" instead of a more direct confrontation. At this point I believe darko is on really slippery grounds.

Ok. So when Darko protects camisade, he’s scummy. When he attacks him, he’s also scummy. BTW, I’m pretty sure that entire post by Darko was meant to mock you. And what kind of "direct confrontation" do you want? If you want camisade to talk, it’s quite necessary to apply a certain amount of pressure (which you also did not hesitate to do 3 posts back).

And now, the final coup de grace. Protecting camisade, attacking the attacker of camisade. He probably thought this was a smart thing to do.

He only said he liked camisade because of this:

And now I'll Unvote. I don't think anyone's behavior after that was very scummy after that, so I'm not going to vote for now.

Naturally, Darko is going to like anyone who doesn’t suspect him, and vice versa (hence his vote on you) seeing as he is scum.

Then again getting concerned when his scumbuddy gets some votes:

He only says this because Oman joined the camisade wagon. To me, he is just getting hopeful at the prospect of a townie lynch, because none of the other wagons he got on passed 2 votes. Notice, if he gets any sort of confirmation that the wagon is indeed gaining momentum, he can jump right back onto it, riding it to a mislynch.

This is starting to get obvious. While darko has consistently defended Hjallti, and consistently attacked me, he has been very shifty in regards to camisade. I see a strong tie between these two right now.

Since Darko ahs been consistently defending Hjallti and attacking you, it must also follow that Hjallti is a scum buddy. Correct?

Camisade : Lurkish.

Inactive. Not lurkish. Hence the need for a replacement.

Voted Hjalltii out of the blue to "draw discussion", but didn't come up with any conclusions from her "test" - could be distancing.

He never said it was a test. His aim was to spark discussion by enticing others to comment on his rash voting. Under this light, he clearly succeeded in his endeavour.

Tries to throw mud on Oman via Darko, like Hjallti is doing.

Excuse me,

how

do you actually "throw mud" on someone

through

someone else? Especially when the intermediary is a scum? Furthermore,

how

does camisade even come

close

to throwing suspicion on oman?

But then berates pulswidth for berating me on my Hjallti vote.

Like camisade said, he suspects Hjallti is suspicious for distancing from Darko. In other words, he agrees with your take on Hjallti. If pulswidth tries to berate you for suspecting Hjallti, naturally camisade would come to the defense because his own opinions are being assaulted as well.

Otherwise lurkish on D1, assumes a very weak anti-lynch position.

And doesn’t it make sense that scum would be pro-lynch, i.e.

trying

to lynch?

Regarding Albert's vote, Darko's attack on him does not look like distancing for me. I was actually giving town points for Camisade due to that attack.

Thank you for being the first to acknowledge this.

camisade, I'm still not liking your explanation for that weird vote on Hjallti early in the game. You said that the reason you voted was to provoke discussion, and then unvoted because it wasn't generating very much discussion..

What he actually said was this: "My reason for posting this was to draw up discussion, considering this game was basically at a standstill and

it worked a little at least.

And now I'll Unvote." I think I’ll let you guys decide whether that bore any resemblance at all to what pulsewidth was insinuating.

…AND because Hjallti wasn't responding. But Hjallti posted a couple of days before that he would be on very sparingly over the next 10 days, so why would you expect responses from him? If your goal was to generate discussion, why not put a vote on someone who was being more active?

"Why should I have kept my vote? Its not like it was making Hjalti say anything." He saw no reason to keep the vote on Hjallti because (1) he did not suspect her and (2) she was not responding to the pressure anyway. Note, the intent of camisade’s vote on Hjallti was not to provoke response from her, but to provoke response from

everyone else

in the thread.

[d3sisted]

I look at the night kills and I'm seeing Vig. N0 was most likely a random shot. N1 he kills Gatorguy91, and I'm not surprised:

I'm STILL Giving him time to claim.

Or not.

Vote Darko

Pretty scummy hammer, I probably would've suspected him for it too.