Mini 486: GAME OVER!

[vollkan]

While I agree with volkan that it's quite likely that TheHermit is just a loose playing newbie, I still think he is lynch-worthy. Even ignoring his "backtracking", I think his reasoning for his vote on oj and his response to sudden supicion on him are both pretty damn scummy and can't be taken back. I also don't like Oman's single interaction then complete ignorance of TheHermit. Atm, he looks like the most likely scum to me.

From this, it seems you have 3 main points against Hermit ignoring the "backtracking" stuff:
1) His OJ vote
2) His mental breakdown
3) Oman's interaction

1) The thing here is that I have seen the "lynch a liability" attitude displayed by quite a significant number of players meta, most of whom are newbish. Indeed, it isn't so different to "lynch a lurker" in any respect. Personally, I am totally against lynching lurkers and lynching liabilities because it more often than not just gives scum a free kill. My point is, though, that I don't think Hermit's OJ vote alone is lynch-worthy stuff, mainly because it is not an uncommon attitude among the inexperienced.

2) I had a similar sort of reaction to suspicion (though not as melodramatic) in my first game of mafia and I was vanilla so I am a little hesistant to class this as a grade-A scumtell. I have been pushing Hermit very hard and, hence, I could almost understand his cracking. That said, Hermit has definitely crossed the line in emotional appeals, which moves him beyond my usual tolerance for such behaviour.

3) Oman. It's very interesting that Oman did accept Hermit's backtracking/explanation of his OJ vote. To save you all the trouble of finding Oman's post:

I think the Hermits comment was scummy, but that post 101 (^) did rationalise it for me.

DFN is just digging himself into a hole here, and while I realise I'm the only one on him vote-wise, I think I'm on the right track.

What's interesting is that Oman went right back to attacking DFN. Remember, DFN was the one who concocted the ridiculous theory about OJ doing it all as a scum plot. Oman knew his anti-DFN position was not popularly shared and, in the context, he could quite easily have shifted to Hermit; but he didn't. He even said "I think I'm on the right track". It looks an awful lot like he was trying to steer people away from Hermit.

Now, I have something else for you all to ponder:

Gorckat, may I ask if you think who, or both, or either of DFN or OJ could be scum at this moment (and I don't mean could as in "well anyone could if they're selected randomly" number wise, I mean by their actions)? Thank you.

Right now Nelly hits high on my list along with DFN.

Gorckat is getting my attention but so far seems relativly pro-town.

1) Oman specifically seeks Gorc's view
2) Oman, very oddly IMO, says Gorckat is getting his attention, but also seems pro-town.

If it came down to it, right now I would favour lynching Hermit over nobody at all; but the lynch isn't right now so that doesn't matter. There is still plenty of time to look at the other avenues. I don't feel we are going to get any more out of Hermit other than defeatist appeals to emotion, so I think it is definitely worth looking at things like the Gorckat stuff I posted above.

[JordanA24]

Sorry for the delay in getting this up

First of all,

Unvote

I have got no problem quick lynching a person who acts this ODD in the random stage and doesnt want to explain it...

Woah! What a horrible statement, do you really want to end the day that quickly with such little evidence. Very righteous

FOS: Nelly

I'm here! I'm alive! Nobody vote me off for being inactive!

That was very jumpy, it was Page 2, no-one was voting for him, yet he pleads not to be voted off.

Sucks that random stage is over so quickly.

Surely any townie would rather catch scum than random vote.

As we are possibly out of the random stage (ALREADY!)

Same as above, only more serious I'd say, since Page 3 should be considered past the random vote stage anyway.

Hang on, you say Oj is your top suspect for quite a fair reason, yet you're voting somebody who hasn't posted yet.

FOS: Elias & Oj/Paradox

But that doesn't automatically make him scum. Some of the comments made about him here suggest that he's anti-town no matter what side he's on, though, which leads me to think we're better off lynching him sooner than later.

Whet the hell? So you suggest we quicklynch Oj on Page 4, and you can't come up with your own reasoning that we should, so you try and use other people's comments about him. Very opportunistic and a horrible idea.

FOS: TheHermit

Oman, can i just ask how Nelly comes high on your list? I've just read back and as far as i can see he/she has only posted twice, hard to tell from that.

Ah just noticed that line. Indeed it is very strange to make a comment like that. Though maybe a bit too reckless for a mafia?

Surely if you've read Nelly's posts you'd have noticed something as scummy as that. And when you do "notice" it, you defend him with WIFOM. This is poor.

FOS: SPAG and Nelly

I'm starting to think we're best off killing ojpower immediately so his lurking, random-voting self can't kill us later when we're at LyLo. At this point I don't even care whether he's scum or not, I want him gone.

Vote: ojpower

Oh dear, this post is horrible, you stick to your already bad idea of quicklynching Oj, and you say you don't care whether he's scum either. You are quite the scummiest person I've seen for a while. Even with your reasoning in Post 101, he could still be replaced.

Yes, I realize it's a scummy thing to do. No, this won't change my opinion. I don't want some lurker coming in at the eleventh hour to drop a stupid, senseless vote that the scum all jump on for the win, or even worse, stay hidden so that it's impossible for the active towns to get a lynch on the active scum for want of a single vote.

My vote comes off when he contributes something meaningful or he gets replaced. Not a moment before. Unless somebody does something very scummy.

Now you've realised what a horrible post you've made, and you're backtracking.

Actually, Nelly's comment is only a shade different from The Hermit going after oj...

So, Nelly deserves a vote, and TheHermit deserves a semi-FOS for pretty much the same thing.

Pulse hasn't added much lately... you got anything to add?

2 posts later, Pulse posted, deliberate lurking?

FOS: Pulse

Actually I dont think that is a bad Ideal Gorckat....

Vote:Nelly

I really hope this is a joke, if it's not, WTF are you doing? Even if it is a joke, this is a seriously poor contrabution considering how much has happened since you have posted last.

That is about all you arte going to get from me on Day One so vote me or leave me alone sir...

Same point as last time. And someone mentioned Jester, while it would seem plausible for such poor play, there are only Mafia, Masons, Townies and a Vig in this game according to the mod.

--------------------

Nelly claims

--------------------

Nelly claimed for absolutely no reason whatsoever, which carries on nicely from his earlier dire play. I cannot figure out whether this is scummy or stupid. I don't know, call it WIFOM, but would scum draw this much attention to themselves. Scum often give up and vote themselves, but I've never seen them blow up this spectacularly under no pressure, I'm leaning towards stupidness than scummyness. The bandwagon also built up really fast on him, which is a tell that the scum are pushing this wagon.

Well I've never lynched a mafia on day one. =(

Vote:Nelly632

Unfortunately(unless he's mafia), he's forced our hand. It's 100% necessary to lynch someone who doesn't play.

that puts him at -3 I believe

This seems rather too sure that Nelly is scum to me, I agree that Nelly's play is very scummy, but outright stating that he's scum doesn't seem right to me, it could easily be a null tell on it's own (It's a common newbie mistake, I fell foul of it once as well), but it was also combined with saying that Nelly was at -3, when his vote put him at -1, which was pretty scummy and could very easily have ended up with Nelly being accidently lynched. It could have been a miscount, but being 2 off seems a bit much. I hardly see why the lynch is 100% necessary either, in fact, it fits with the accidental quicklynch theory. He says it's 100% necessary Nelly is lynched, someone sees that, and is further convinced that Nelly should be lynched, so puts a vote on him thinking he's putting him at -2, but is actually lynching Nelly. I think this deserves a

FOS: Paradox

Anti-town play can only hurt the town, whether the person is mafia or not.

O RLY? If Mafia don't start looking anti-town, how are the town supposed to catch them?

Back on the -3/-1 issue:

Yes. I didn't realize he was near a lynch so I made casual and incomplete count. My fault entirely. But take notice that I said, "I believe." It's important to account for human error.

How could you have not realised that he was near a lynch when votes for him were flying in left, right & centre? And the way you try and dismiss it with crap reasoning doesn't help it either, you made a "casual and incomplete count", if you're taking the trouble to count the votes in the first place, I really doubt it'd be casual. And how does saying "I believe" rather than "He is" make any difference?

Unfortunately(unless he's mafia), he's forced our hand. It's 100% necessary to lynch someone who doesn't play.

that puts him at -3 I believe

this is by far the scummiest sentences thus far in this game...

100% necessary? Forced our hand? -3?

If he doesnt want to post then he is replaced...someone is hungry for a lynch..why is that?...

If anyone here is hungry for a lynch, it's you, for me, because you seem pretty damn worried about your little friend Nelly and quick to deflect suspicion to me.

And if someone is trying to deflect suspicion, it's you. I can't see how CKD is more lynch-happy than you are. You say it's 100% necessary to lynch Nelly, CKD (rightly says) that your post was very suspect, and you say that CKD is hungrier for a lynch than you are. That's ridiculous.

Therefore the only logical choice is to lynch him now.

Oh yes, you are so not lynch-happy right now.

--------------------

Vollkan claims

--------------------

Would you prefer that I vig pulse?

Para
Pulse
Elias

I didn't want you to misinterpret a "yes" as "more than Paradox"

I would, right now, prefer you didn't vig anyone just yet. I would want most if not all players to re-read and post a scumlist.

OK, a dead scum has posted this, which is strong evidence that Paradox and probably Pulse are town, it might have been distancing, but we're talking about vigging someone here, so it's not easy to believe, especially on Pulse, since there was no pressure on him anyway.

Also, if Nelly came up as scum, and I had used my vote on hermit, it would have appeared that I was trying to distract from the wagon, and thus protect a scumbuddy. There are two pretty solid (IMO) reasons that I voted for Nelly as opposed to hermit.

And what if TheHermit is scum and Nelly is town?

Pulsewidth, spag, thehermit, and sir tornado have not really posted enough to warrant a judgement right now either way.

I find this comment to be horribly neutral, I think it could be said for Sir T, but the other three have posted at least 9 times, and I certainly have opinions on all three.

What makes you think the scum will kill volkan?

not that I am a fan of answering a question with a question, but what makes you think that vollkan will not be NKed by the mafia?

I really don't like how you simply evaded the question there CKD.

The stupid scum is dead…and the other one has my vote on him.

Wow, this page has really opened my eyes towards you CKD, why are you so certain Elias is scum? A common scumtell if you ask me. Though, as I said before, it's not a foolproof tell, but still, you're looking a lot scummier than you were before.

I said he his town in my book until DAY 2...but if I had money, I would put it on vollkan being NK tonight.

Oooooor the mafia could simply pick somebody else to kill tonight and laugh as we lynch the townie dayvig tomorrow. If they're really crafty, they'd worm some way into making his survival looks suspicious so that the dayvig would be forced to lash out at one of his attackers, possibly killing another townie. Hey! Sorta like what you're doing!

FOS: curiouskarmadog

He's confirmed as the dayvig. He's not confirmed scum or town. Even the night won't change that... well, unless he turns up dead in the morning.

I really don't think the post you quoted, or any other posts by CKD say that he is willing to lynch Vollkan if he doesn't turn up dead the next morning. I also think the death scene quite clearly indicates that Vollkan is a one-shot Vig. Your attack on him is pure BS.

1) Hermit was contributing. I would rather see a scummy player who wasn't contributing to town (nelly) lynched then a scummy player who was contributing (hermit).

So, you would rather lynch a lurkerscum than a vocal scum? Even though the vocal scum is spreading his scummy ideas amongst the town, while the lurkerscum is doing no harm to the town apart from being scum.

In my opinion I had already cleared CKD in my mind as being scum so I was not looking for a reaction from him

Why?

--------------------

Elias claims

--------------------

Are you kidding me? Each one of those massive posts takes about 15-30 minutes to write. I've barely had any time to look for scum.

Pardon? I understand that your massive posts take time to write, but that doesn't give you an excuse not to scumhunt, you don't spend all of your time on here writing defenses surely?

I just don't like the whole 'avoiding scum tells despite suspicions is a good thing'. Townies should play fearlessly.

The extreme loss of temper also doesn't ingratiate me. What you basically said is, 'Reason doesn't work, so let me name call.'

vote: Elias_the_thief

Getting pissed off, like Elias just did, I don't think automatically means scumminess IMO. I've seen townies lose it like Elias did loads of times. Using that as a reason to vote for him doesn't work for me. Though I agree with you about the first quoted point, a townies job is to catch scum, a scum's job is to look as pro-town as possible, not the other way round.

And now you vote for me. What are your reasons? You are simply jumping on because you can. First, you have not responded to any of my arguments, and let Vollkan do that work for you. Second, Vollkan hasnt even responded to my most recent proof that I didnt make a contradiction. Thus my first and most prominent reason for making my vote stands. I have no idea why I'm being voted by practically everyone. I want an explanation from Gorkcat and the hermit as to why theyre voting me.

Gorckat gave about 3 seperate and independant reasons for voting you, though, TheHermit didn't, he simply said:

I don't like the way Elias is trying to misrepresent me. It's good that the town's not buying it (as I clarified my position seconds after voting oj), but I get the feeling he thinks if he repeats an argument often enough people will believe it. I find the points against him logically sound given the information we have.

Vote: Elias_the_thief

Elias wasn't misrepresenting you, you said "Ojpower should be voted off now", Elias pointed it out, and said you were scummy for saying it, that doesn't look like misrepresentation to me, and you backtracked later. Then you said you were voting him because Vollkan's points against him were logically sound, basically, not giving any of your own reasons at all (or at least not giving any truthful ones)

Post 133 is me being a prick to see some reactions,

in my mind the people who get really upset are less scummy then the people who take it in stride

… Karma Dog once again questions me instead of voting for me, this is a great sign in my eyes… He has more then enough reasons to vote for me now he could simply say…

“I ask and I ask you simple questions but you refuse to answer so now you leave me no choice but to vote for you Nelly”

But instead he stay patient and gives me some chances to get myself out of hot water, very pro-town move…

In other words, you said calm people are more scummy, but ckd (who reacted calmly) is not.

You later said:

In my opinion I had already cleared CKD in my mind as being scum so I was not looking for a reaction from him... Being a jerk was a attempt to get a read from people not CKD because I once again felt I had a good enough read on him... I will give you a example of what I was loking for...

A calm person:
"It looks like someone is taking this game a little bit to serious, tossing insults is not going to take the heat off of you"

A not calm person:
"It is funny how someone can contribute nothing to this game, come out here vote for themselves and then call the rest of us foolish. You need to stop being a noob and get replaced instead of being a jerk."

I can't believe I didn't notice this at first, this is very scummy of Nelly.

FOS: Nelly

Okay, there's a lot here for me to digest. MAN, you guys post novels. After sleeping on it I'm not as confident about my vote; I'll need to read through the latest developments in the thread. If my opinion remains the same I'll put the vote back on, but I don't want the day ending before I've finished catching up.

Unvote

Ah, another backtrack. Elias (rightly) asks "Why are you voting me?", and rather than admit you were just following Vollkan, you unvote, using the "I need to reread" excuse.

3. As I said before, I only had the time to skim the relevant posts, and I got the impression that Elias was dodgy, shifty, and suspicious.

Elias seemed to respond to everything thrown at him, so I fail to see how he was dodgy and shifty.

Quality, not quantity. I thought your points were reasonable, but apparently your entire strategy revolves around throwing ancillary points around in the hopes of... what? That they'll crack under the pressure? That someone else will do something stupid so you can go throw everything including the kitchen sink at THEM? Had I noticed earlier that this is what you were doing, I wouldn't have voted for him. Is that what you wanted to hear? That your style of investigation is counter-productive?

Pressuring is a perfectly valid method of scumhunting. And besides, how does his strategy affect the validity of his points against you, you even admitted that his points were decent, so basically, you realise that his points are good and hard to argue against, so you try and dodge them by saying his strategy is poor.

When you yourself admit that your points are garbage, what else am I supposed to say? I thought they were compelling at the time, but they lose a lot of weight when you yourself say, "By the way, I don't believe in that".

This is an outright lie, he in no way said his points were poor.

I thought that's what you said.

I briefly skimmed the contents of your diatribes

There we are Hermit, there's your contradiction.

Curious Karma Dog

His failure to Hammer me when I was one lynch away has really left me to believe that he is townie. While Yes, hammering me would have put a lot of heat on him in Day Two, I personally believe that if he was Scum it would have been worth the risk to ensure a Townie is lynched on Day One, giving the scum a slight advantage going into Day Two.

Please explain to me how an Earth a 1-1 exchange between scum and town at all favours the scum.

Hermit
“Were best off killing ojpower IMMEDIATELY” now it is the immediately part that concerns me the most. I cant help but feel like he is rushing the game and making it seem like we urgently need to do this.

In this game of Mafia, TheHermit has learned that not only can he never make jokes but that every little word he says will get zoomed in on like it's the entire point of his post. I meant "immediately" as opposed to "later, when lynching a townie puts us in a really bad position".

Well what do you expect? Not really defending yourself are you? You're just trying to use your newbieness as an excuse, which is not going to work.

I was going to write another fuming defense, pointing out how what Elias pointed out aren't really backtracks and how Nelly is once again misrepresenting me, but I decided to take a walk instead. It gave me a view to the other side of this whole situation. So, lemme try this again.

I'm a new player to mafia, and I haven't been subject to the suspicion I've been the target of in this game before. From my point of view, there are explanations for all the things that have been pointed out. But you don't believe me, and I can't prove them. Honestly, I know I look bad; I'd probably be right along with you if this were someone else. The only way to prove I'm telling the truth is to die and get my card flipped. It sucks that my death will probably not help the town catch any scum, but I've no one to blame for that but myself. I only hope lynching me doesn't lead to the town losing.

I dislike repeating myself, and I admit I got more than a little heated over the last few days. I apologize for losing my temper. I hope that if we are in any future games together we will be able to start with a clean slate.

Well, time to stop beating around the bush and get this over with. Go town!

Vote:TheHermit

And here you do the classic newbscum thing and vote for yourself saying "Go Town", hoping that we will take pity and Unvote. Again, it's not going to happen.

--------------------

TheHermit claims

--------------------

Uh oh! Look out everyone, TheHermit is backtracking again! Everybody bandwagon!

Unvote

Note for future play: This sort of negative behaviour does not help your cause.

TheHermit's recent behaviour has swung it for me.

Vote:TheHermit

, -1 by my count.

[vollkan]

That post was brilliant. I just read through that and I think you make a very convincing and clear case.

Furthermore, you have actually gone and completed the "considering other avenues" thing I just suggested.

Before anyone drops the hammer, I think it might be highly advisable that we hear from Hermit.

[curiouskarmadog]

great post...

looks like Hermit will hang today....I would perfer it to be Para..but Hermit's play is just bad.

[Elias_the_thief]

Same as above, only more serious I'd say, since Page 3 should be considered past the random vote stage anyway.

Hang on, you say Oj is your top suspect for quite a fair reason, yet you're voting somebody who hasn't posted yet.

FOS: Elias & Oj/Paradox

It's called pressure.

Also, if Nelly came up as scum, and I had used my vote on hermit, it would have appeared that I was trying to distract from the wagon, and thus protect a scumbuddy. There are two pretty solid (IMO) reasons that I voted for Nelly as opposed to hermit.

And what if TheHermit is scum and Nelly is town?

It's called a hypothetical.

1) Hermit was contributing. I would rather see a scummy player who wasn't contributing to town (nelly) lynched then a scummy player who was contributing (hermit).

So, you would rather lynch a lurkerscum than a vocal scum? Even though the vocal scum is spreading his scummy ideas amongst the town, while the lurkerscum is doing no harm to the town apart from being scum.

Yes. Scum that talk still give you hints (inadvertantly) as to who their partners might be.

--------------------

Elias claims

--------------------

Are you kidding me? Each one of those massive posts takes about 15-30 minutes to write. I've barely had any time to look for scum.

Pardon? I understand that your massive posts take time to write, but that doesn't give you an excuse not to scumhunt, you don't spend all of your time on here writing defenses surely?

During that time period? It's about all I had time for, considering I actually do have a life outside of mafiascum.

And now you vote for me. What are your reasons? You are simply jumping on because you can. First, you have not responded to any of my arguments, and let Vollkan do that work for you. Second, Vollkan hasnt even responded to my most recent proof that I didnt make a contradiction. Thus my first and most prominent reason for making my vote stands. I have no idea why I'm being voted by practically everyone. I want an explanation from Gorkcat and the hermit as to why theyre voting me.

Gorckat gave about 3 seperate and independant reasons for voting you, though, TheHermit didn't

...

Gorckat once again used one reason as if it were the only reason,despite my requests and claims that I used all three reasons posted in my decision. He also did not have three reasons, he stated his one reason thrice.


The rest of your case I agree with, it brings out most of the points I've already brought against Hermit, and some more. It also brought some new things into light in relation to other players.

No one hammer til Hermit gets to say something!

[curiouskarmadog]

by my count, Hermit is only at -2.

Elias, Nelly, Para, Jordan....

Of course Para and Elias are on another wagon....I encourage everyone to do a play by play on Para!!!..this is our lynch..I think that this is Hermit's first game and is just a bad townie....lets look at it this way...if Hermit is scum, who is his scum buddy?...This lynch is too easy...if Hermit was scum, I think he would have hammered Nelly.

Para actually has lied and used quote out of context to form a case and deflect suspicion from himself. He is our scum...he gets his vote in and just disappears?

TOWN this is our scum....

[JordanA24]

Same as above, only more serious I'd say, since Page 3 should be considered past the random vote stage anyway.

Hang on, you say Oj is your top suspect for quite a fair reason, yet you're voting somebody who hasn't posted yet.

FOS: Elias & Oj/Paradox

It's called pressure.

If someone hasn't posted in the first two pages, it's likely that player has either not noticed the game's started, or has just forgotten about it. Saying that, I suppose I can accept that explaination, especially since you did get your request for a prod denied.

Also, if Nelly came up as scum, and I had used my vote on hermit, it would have appeared that I was trying to distract from the wagon, and thus protect a scumbuddy. There are two pretty solid (IMO) reasons that I voted for Nelly as opposed to hermit.

And what if TheHermit is scum and Nelly is town?

It's called a hypothetical.

And my point isn't?

1) Hermit was contributing. I would rather see a scummy player who wasn't contributing to town (nelly) lynched then a scummy player who was contributing (hermit).

So, you would rather lynch a lurkerscum than a vocal scum? Even though the vocal scum is spreading his scummy ideas amongst the town, while the lurkerscum is doing no harm to the town apart from being scum.

Yes. Scum that talk still give you hints (inadvertantly) as to who their partners might be.

I suppose that's a fair point, but I still think that an active scum is much more valuable to the scum than a lurkerscum, and now, since we only have 2 scum, if one is active and one is a lurker, the active one can't give as much away about who is scumbuddy is than if they were both active.

--------------------

Elias claims

--------------------

Are you kidding me? Each one of those massive posts takes about 15-30 minutes to write. I've barely had any time to look for scum.

Pardon? I understand that your massive posts take time to write, but that doesn't give you an excuse not to scumhunt, you don't spend all of your time on here writing defenses surely?

During that time period? It's about all I had time for, considering I actually do have a life outside of mafiascum.

But if you signed up for the game and got a town role, I'd expect you to try and find scum as well as defend yourself. I know that everyone has a life outside Mafiascum, but finding scum is the town's primary job, and not making yourself look scummy is the secondary townie job, you don't have to respond to every post made against you immediatly.

And now you vote for me. What are your reasons? You are simply jumping on because you can. First, you have not responded to any of my arguments, and let Vollkan do that work for you. Second, Vollkan hasnt even responded to my most recent proof that I didnt make a contradiction. Thus my first and most prominent reason for making my vote stands. I have no idea why I'm being voted by practically everyone. I want an explanation from Gorkcat and the hermit as to why theyre voting me.

Gorckat gave about 3 seperate and independant reasons for voting you, though, TheHermit didn't

...

Gorckat once again used one reason as if it were the only reason,despite my requests and claims that I used all three reasons posted in my decision. He also did not have three reasons, he stated his one reason thrice.

In addition, it would look bad to vote for him with the mounting Nelly wagon anyhow, so I voted Nelly.

1)

You continue to say not looking bad is a reason not to vote someone you are suspicious of.

After voting Nelly, you go round a little with xombie, then address Nelly's suspicions where you first said (as I've quoted before):

and if you turned up scum and I had in the heat of your wagon voted for him instead, it would have appeared that I was simply distracting from your wagon purposefully.

2)

I just don't like the whole 'avoiding scum tells despite suspicions is a good thing'. Townies should play fearlessly.

3)

The extreme loss of temper also doesn't ingratiate me. What you basically said is, 'Reason doesn't work, so let me name call.'

Three seperate reasons, 1 & 2 seem similar, but they are not totally the same.

No one hammer til Hermit gets to say something!

Seconded

[Paradoxombie]

Para actually has lied and used quote out of context to form a case and deflect suspicion from himself. He is our scum...he gets his vote in and just disappears?

Jesus Christ would you please stop saying I'm lying? We all know that you don't really know whether I was lying or made a mistake, and when you talk so authoritively about stuff like that it'll make you look like an idiot if your wrong. Also I don't know what you're talking about me disappearing. I've put more effort and logic into justifying and explaining each of my votes than you have in all of your attack on me which you've been sitting on for a very long while.

Well I've never lynched a mafia on day one. =(

Vote:Nelly632

Unfortunately(unless he's mafia), he's forced our hand. It's 100% necessary to lynch someone who doesn't play.

that puts him at -3 I believe

This seems rather too sure that Nelly is scum to me, I agree that Nelly's play is very scummy, but outright stating that he's scum doesn't seem right to me, it could easily be a null tell on it's own (It's a common newbie mistake, I fell foul of it once as well)

I didn't say he was scum, in fact I later said it was probably more likely he was town. I guess it's not too important but I might as well set the record straight.

Yes. I didn't realize he was near a lynch so I made casual and incomplete count. My fault entirely. But take notice that I said, "I believe." It's important to account for human error.

How could you have not realised that he was near a lynch when votes for him were flying in left, right & centre? And the way you try and dismiss it with crap reasoning doesn't help it either, you made a "casual and incomplete count", if you're taking the trouble to count the votes in the first place, I really doubt it'd be casual. And how does saying "I believe" rather than "He is" make any difference?

Well Vollkan later pointed out that it's 6 to lynch instead of 7 and someone voted 1 minute before I posted and that might've been the cause. And saying "I believe" instead of "He is" may not change the scumminess of my mistake, but there's still a pretty big ****ing difference in the meaning between them.

I think we need a votecount

Curious is correct, Hermit is at -2. I have no time for a vote count atm. -Mod

[curiouskarmadog]

Para actually has lied and used quote out of context to form a case and deflect suspicion from himself. He is our scum...he gets his vote in and just disappears?

Jesus Christ would you please stop saying I'm lying? We all know that you don't really know whether I was lying or made a mistake, and when you talk so authoritively about stuff like that it'll make you look like an idiot if your wrong. Also I don't know what you're talking about me disappearing. I've put more effort and logic into justifying and explaining each of my votes than you have in all of your attack on me which you've been sitting on for a very long while.

You put more effort, huh? What a joke. You try to build case on me by pulling a quote out of context to show I am scummy. When I call you on you false implications, you say

I didn't know the context, I only read it in passing like I said.

Lots of effort put forth to build a case..”read it passing”…I have been “sitting” on it because unlike you I just don’t jump on easy wagons.

[Paradoxombie]

Para actually has lied and used quote out of context to form a case and deflect suspicion from himself. He is our scum...he gets his vote in and just disappears?

Jesus Christ would you please stop saying I'm lying? We all know that you don't really know whether I was lying or made a mistake, and when you talk so authoritively about stuff like that it'll make you look like an idiot if your wrong. Also I don't know what you're talking about me disappearing. I've put more effort and logic into justifying and explaining each of my votes than you have in all of your attack on me which you've been sitting on for a very long while.

You put more effort, huh? What a joke. You try to build case on me by pulling a quote out of context to show I am scummy. When I call you on you false implications, you say

I didn't know the context, I only read it in passing like I said.

Lots of effort put forth to build a case..”read it passing”…I have been “sitting” on it because unlike you I just don’t jump on easy wagons.

You attack me as soon as I make the slightest mistake and ride me the whole time you bring up the same obvious points over and over. Then you spend the rest of the time trying to convince everyone else to attack me by assuring over and over again that I'm today's lynch and I'm scum.

Well guess what? You've got no idea whether or not I'm scum, no matter how many times you say that you do. And the things you are saying seem to convince no one. So why don't you look for somthing or consider some new possiblities instead of sitting here repeating the same things and attacking me like I'm wasting time? If it get's to a deadline you can always play your consitency card and continue sitting on me.

[curiouskarmadog]

Well guess what? You've got no idea whether or not I'm scum, no matter how many times you say that you do. And the things you are saying seem to convince no one. So why don't you look for somthing or consider some new possiblities instead of sitting here repeating the same things and attacking me like I'm wasting time? If it get's to a deadline you can always play your consitency card and continue sitting on me.

I do not need to play any type of card...your scummy nature is "forcing my hand".

[Elias_the_thief]

Mod: I request a deadline extension

There is much more to discuss today, and I'd rather at least take a look at Para before the day ends. Please repeal the deadline so that we have the best chance of making an informed lynch.
(im rereading on para currently, posting later.)

[vollkan]

Mod: I request a deadline extension
There is much more to discuss today, and I'd rather at least take a look at Para before the day ends. Please repeal the deadline so that we have the best chance of making an informed lynch.
(im rereading on para currently, posting later.)

I agree, for precisely the same reason (ie. Para).

That said, deadline is non-retractable. It wouldn't really be right to retract it.

[Paradoxombie]

Isn't the deadline, like, 7 days away?

[Elias_the_thief]

It wasnt really right to place it in the first place. There is impressive activity in this game, and by placing the deadline, Albert has handicapped town once more (as he has done with several odd rules thus far). Really, It would be a surprise to see town win this (although I think I've got scum narrowed down to a few subjects). Another problem is the possibility of scum hiding in the shadows while a protown player messes up and gets lynched. There's a lot wrong with our current situation.

[Albert B. Rampage]

I'm considering it. Keep discussion going.

I am going to add a new special rule: don't second guess me. I have already asked extensive advice from higher powers and the most experienced mods, so it isn't your place to question me at every turn. Honestly, I only have a limited amount of time to finish this game up because of a new personal routine I am implementing. Upon a rough estimation, I would give this game maybe another 5 weeks or so.

EDIT: If I can somehow find replacements before deadline, I am likely to give you an extension of a week or two. If not, deadline is set in cement and the replacements will arrive on day 2.

[Elias_the_thief]

Unfortunately(unless he's mafia), he's forced our hand. It's 100% necessary to lynch someone who doesn't play.

Upon rereading, this is one of the scummiest posts in the game. Far scummier then Hermits, though his was similar. He says it is 100% necessary, ignoring the possibility of replacement, and later, he renounces replacement. He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

Anyway if ABR is willing to replace Nelly, then that's that, but I am against it for ethical reasons. I don't believe in replacing except for disapearing and direct gamebreaking.

Later, Paradoxombie attacks Oman, and votes him. I thought maybe this was a protown point, but at the time para was getting voted by multiple people. It's just as likely that he was voting he he though was scum, as it is that he was last minute distancing. So I'm gonna call this a null point.

Para promises to look at other players...he never does. Right now, Para is looking just as suspicious as Hermit in my opinion, if not more. I'm considering changing, after I look more closely at Paras recent posts.

unvote

for now.

[vollkan]

Upon rereading, this is one of the scummiest posts in the game. Far scummier then Hermits, though his was similar. He says it is 100% necessary, ignoring the possibility of replacement, and later, he renounces replacement. He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

You only noticed this now?

Later, Paradoxombie attacks Oman, and votes him. I thought maybe this was a protown point, but at the time para was getting voted by multiple people. It's just as likely that he was voting he he though was scum, as it is that he was last minute distancing. So I'm gonna call this a null point.

I said ages ago that Oman/Para looked like distancing, though I looked at it more from Oman's unvoting of Para.

In all likely hood he'll turn up scum anyway, but its certainly strange that this holds.

I would want Paradox vigged much more then I would want Elias vigged. I think that Elias is more pro-town then pulse atm.

I don't see how I have a "poorly explained vote" I explained everything I found wrong with Paradox's vote.

Vollkan, I'd want to hear in from every player before we start vigging. Assuming 1) your claim is real which is a tossup atm and 2) nothing else happens in the meantime.

Finally Unvote , this new twist changes things.

My point is this:
Oman only expressed very half-hearted hesitation when I "suggested" vigging pulse. He said "I would prefer it if you waited...etc. but I support it" When it comes to Para, however, Oman is far stronger in his opposition to a vigging. Furthermore, it's odd that Oman unvoted since he claimed that he suspected Para but wanted hestitation. When I challenged Oman on his unvote

Oh it doesn't I still think he's scum, but you remove the need for my vote.

This is a very strange post by Oman, for obvious reasons.

[Elias_the_thief]

Upon rereading, this is one of the scummiest posts in the game. Far scummier then Hermits, though his was similar. He says it is 100% necessary, ignoring the possibility of replacement, and later, he renounces replacement. He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

You only noticed this now?

Yeah, I'm disappointed in myself. Though I dont remember you mentioning it before now.

[curiouskarmadog]

Unfortunately(unless he's mafia), he's forced our hand. It's 100% necessary to lynch someone who doesn't play.

Upon rereading, this is one of the scummiest posts in the game. Far scummier then Hermits, though his was similar. He says it is 100% necessary, ignoring the possibility of replacement, and later, he renounces replacement. He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

hmmm....so where is your vote again?

[Elias_the_thief]

no where. I unvoted. Im thinking about it and rereading paras recent posts (well im not now, but i plan to before voting, probably tonight or tomorrow)

[Paradoxombie]

He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

haha that's pretty ****ed up, man. I get a get out of jail free card if I just change my mind under preassure? It's like the goddamn inquisition the liars who have no real conviction are the ones who live . And you think I've been unreasonable. I also really don't see why you'd think it's worse than what hermit said, so I'd like an answer to why that is.

If you really thought it was so bad for me to think this why don't you try to change my mind? I think you guys gave up pretty quickly when we got to actually using logic. This makes me think you people either don't know what you're talking about and are just acting on instinct or alternatively are scum who don't have any authentic beliefs.

Either way I actually have a very good argument considering I have lynched people in the past for refusing to play in a game where I'm a confirmed townie. Do any of you guys who attack me for this actually have anything like that to confirm that these are really your true beliefs and aren't just saying whatever suits you at the moment?

Para promises to look at other players...he never does.

And what makes you think I didn't?

[Elias_the_thief]

He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

haha that's pretty ****ed up, man. I get a get out of jail free card if I just change my mind under preassure? It's like the goddamn inquisition the liars who have no real conviction are the ones who live . And you think I've been unreasonable. I also really don't see why you'd think it's worse than what hermit said, so I'd like an answer to why that is.

Never once did I say that I would give you a "get out of jail free card". While I admit that its a "damned if ya do, damned if ya dont" kind of situation, I think that its more damning to not back down. As a matter of fact, the way that you avoid suspicion in this scenario is to back down without being presured. So its not really the DIYD-DIYD (see above) situation I described. It makes it even worse when you try to say that replacing in inethical. You say its acceptable in certain cirmumstances, yet you dont even try to find out the circumstances in this scenario. The circumstances were in fact that OJ got banned for being an illegal alt of NAR (they played together in a game). This is probably one in which you'd think it acceptable. Yet you dont even try to find out. And I said I think it *might* be worse because you say that lynching is 100% necessary, which is completely ridiculous.

If you really thought it was so bad for me to think this why don't you try to change my mind? I think you guys gave up pretty quickly when we got to actually using logic. This makes me think you people either don't know what you're talking about and are just acting on instinct or alternatively are scum who don't have any authentic beliefs.

Do you honestly think that it is protown to lynch a player simply because he isnt posting? First, its a random lynch. You have no idea whether he is town or not. Second, you opted to lynch him quickly. So not only is this a complete random lynch, but its a complete random lynch that you want to happen quickly. That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town. Finally, there is absolutely no reason at all that OJ couldnt be replaced.

Either way I actually have a very good argument considering I have lynched people in the past for refusing to play in a game where I'm a confirmed townie. Do any of you guys who attack me for this actually have anything like that to confirm that these are really your true beliefs and aren't just saying whatever suits you at the moment?

First of all, link it up. Give me a link to this game, if you're telling the truth. Second of all, no I dont have proof that I always play this way. Its simply common sense. I guess you could refer to the way I attacked Hermit for this earlier.

Para promises to look at other players...he never does.

And what makes you think I didn't?

You never post a case.

[Paradoxombie]

Bold is me

He doesnt take back that we should lynch people who dont post content (at least hermit took it back)

haha that's pretty ****ed up, man. I get a get out of jail free card if I just change my mind under preassure? It's like the goddamn inquisition the liars who have no real conviction are the ones who live . And you think I've been unreasonable. I also really don't see why you'd think it's worse than what hermit said, so I'd like an answer to why that is.

Never once did I say that I would give you a "get out of jail free card". While I admit that its a "damned if ya do, damned if ya dont" kind of situation, I think that its more damning to not back down.

The simple fact is that you think I'm more scummy than the hermit because he "backtracked" which I believe you attacked him for while I remained consistent.

As a matter of fact, the way that you avoid suspicion in this scenario is to back down without being presured. So its not really the DIYD-DIYD (see above) situation I described.

So I should say somthing not necessarily true to avoid suspicion? I don't see why I'd ever need to "avoid suspicion." Especially when lying is often considered a 100% lynchable offense.

It makes it even worse when you try to say that replacing in inethical.

Again I make an actually argument and you dismiss it without counter-reasoning. Not cool.

You say its acceptable in certain cirmumstances, yet you dont even try to find out the circumstances in this scenario.

WTF do you mean? I read the whole thread

The circumstances were in fact that OJ got banned for being an illegal alt of NAR (they played together in a game). This is probably one in which you'd think it acceptable. Yet you dont even try to find out.

I am talking about Nelly here. Nelly wasn't in a replacing worthy situation

And I said I think it *might* be worse because you say that lynching is 100% necessary, which is completely ridiculous.

Again you have no counter argument, you just dismiss my thoughts as ridiculous. How closed minded is that?

If you really thought it was so bad for me to think this why don't you try to change my mind? I think you guys gave up pretty quickly when we got to actually using logic. This makes me think you people either don't know what you're talking about and are just acting on instinct or alternatively are scum who don't have any authentic beliefs.

Do you honestly think that it is protown to lynch a player simply because he isnt posting?

I'm pretty sure nelly was posting quite actively he just wasn't playing. People who aren't actually posting like OJ are usually replaced making it unecessary to lynch them.

First, its a random lynch. You have no idea whether he is town or not.

exactly, we have no idea if he's town or not. So mafia can just act like this and never give up clues or hints. If they never act, they never act scummy we never find the last mafia and we lose by letting him automatically live.

Second, you opted to lynch him quickly.

No I'm pretty sure we had already tried reasoning with Nelly and he didn't seem to be changing his mind(he never started playing). So as I've already explained we have to lynch someone who's not playing in any way and Nelly fit that criteria. So I voted him. Why would I falter just because he was nearly lynched, the whole point of voting him is to lynch him, dude.

That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town.

that's too bad, if we're gonna have to lynch some random guy inevitably, why not make it sooner so you can get on with hunting?

Finally, there is absolutely no reason at all that OJ couldnt be replaced.

I'm talking about Nelly, here. Again you dismiss my argument where I explained my feeling on replacements. If you don't agree with me, fine, but ABR never showed any sign of replacing Nelly and I don't think he should have anyway.

Either way I actually have a very good argument considering I have lynched people in the past for refusing to play in a game where I'm a confirmed townie. Do any of you guys who attack me for this actually have anything like that to confirm that these are really your true beliefs and aren't just saying whatever suits you at the moment?

First of all, link it up. Give me a link to this game, if you're telling the truth.

Sure, vollkan was in the game as well:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=
Just check out the first lynch.

Second of all, no I dont have proof that I always play this way. Its simply common sense.

I'm sure you'd tear apart my arguments much faster if I was to be so illogical

I guess you could refer to the way I attacked Hermit for this earlier.

Unfortunately the only way to know that they are your true beliefs is to show that your role has no reason for you to lie about it(i.e.honest townies). Since we can't confirm you have no reason to tell such a lie(such as if you were scum) we can't trust that you aren't lying for your own purposes until you're dead.

Para promises to look at other players...he never does.

And what makes you think I didn't?

You never post a case.

If I had noticed anything particularly scummy I would have. If I had developed any new suspicions from looking at people wouldn't I have shown them by now? In the end the only significantly scummy person I found was the hermit.

Once again you fail to show why my beliefs are flawed, a concept you harp on incessantly. If you're not even gonna bother arguing, why should you even bother laying out your lack of a rebuttal? If my thoughts are truly as wrong as you suggest you should surely be able to convince me of it.

[curiouskarmadog]

Whoa what?

That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town.

that's too bad, if we're gonna have to lynch some random guy inevitably, why not make it sooner so you can get on with hunting?

This was biggest slip up so far. “so

you

can get on with hunting”? ummm, aren’t

we

suppose to be hunting scum? Why are you not hunting scum? Not only do you state you want the day to end sooner, your justification to Elias is so “you can get on with hunting:”

HUGE SCUM SLIP UP HERE!

No Para, if I have anything to do with it, we are not going to lynch some random guy. We are going to lynch the scummiest guy in this thread…you.

You say its acceptable in certain cirmumstances, yet you dont even try to find out the circumstances in this scenario.

WTF do you mean? I read the whole thread

Really you read the whole thread? Is that why you pulled something out of context for your case, then said I was just skimming through. So are you reading or skimming?