Mini 517: Tree Stump Mafia: Game Over

[JDodge]

insert standard confirmatory message here

[JDodge]

vote: Adele

[JDodge]

Vote: Quagmire

I can't take it anymore. I'd rather kill you now then have to deal with your horrible play. It's not just that you are acting scummy, you are just playing horribly. I would rather someone inactive than someone who refuses to play correctly.

Hi scum

Unvote, vote: SilverPhoenix

[JDodge]

Hi scum

Unvote, vote: SilverPhoenix

Not much of an analysis, I'm afraid. Your vote is irrelevant if you don't have anything to back it up with. Also, you didn't complain when Pooky did the same thing. So I am not buying your vote at all....nor should anyone else.

You

assume

I have nothing. I actually find it rather odd that you're trying to cast my vote off as nothing, and saying that everyone else should do the same.

Vote: Quagmire
I can't take it anymore. I'd rather kill you now then have to deal with your horrible play. It's not just that you are acting scummy, you are just playing horribly. I would rather someone inactive than someone who refuses to play correctly.

Here you essentially say that you just want him lynched regardless of his alignment; how is that in any way good for the town?

I am mainly annoyed by telling everyone who to vote for. You set your target as Adele since before the game even started, and then you use OMGUS for your target tomorrow. Just horrible.....

And here you assume OMGUS and not the same reasoning behind the votes for Adele. Guess which would probably seem scummier to people?

I wouldn't have pointed this out normally, but since Quagmire refused to change his tactic from the beginning, I can assume that he was seriously playing from then. So what does this mean? Well...it seems like randomness buy why? Why do they (and Bapa Bail) agree with him, and then avoid any real discussion? Is there something I'm missing? Or is this really that easy?

FoS: JDodge, Bapa Bail, Scotmany

Time to start playing seriously, guys.

Is playing unseriously a scumtell?

[JDodge]

And here you assume OMGUS

I was talking about Quagmire targeting MoS for tomorrow. Which it basically was.

Huh, I could've sworn there was more to what you quoted.

Here you essentially say that you just want him lynched regardless of his alignment; how is that in any way good for the town?

Because he isn't playing town. He is playing neutral, and he might as well be lynched for doing so. Can't you see that he is screwing up the town advantage in this game? Should someone who is screwing up the town be lynched? My answer is yes.

If a scum is playing town he must never be lynched.

Your willingness to off someone simply for playing

neutral

is rather odd. Being unreadable =/= being scum.

Is playing unseriously a scumtell?

Look, you guys seemed to obviously have some prior discussion before this game started about who to target, since Quagmire told you and scotmany to vote for Adele and you guys did obediently.

And now you are defending someone whose alignment you don't even know? That seems like scum trying to shut up a dumb-ass scum partner to me.

Everyone, please read the bolded part

very carefully

. Can you see what I see?

[JDodge]

So, if a scum is playing town he must never be lynched?

now that that's fixed

[JDodge]

So, if a scum is playing town he must never be lynched?

That isn't what I said. I said that we should lynch obvious neutral because they do not help the town

(or the scum, for that matter)

whatsoever. As Pooky said, it is better to get rid of him now than later. I am talking about strictly neutral people, not scum playing town or vice versa.

I never mentioned Quag being scum/town anywhere, because obviously no one has any clue, including yourself.

Tell me how a town

lynch

helps the town

[JDodge]

Tell me how a town lynch helps the town

YOU DON'T KNOW QUAG IS TOWN! NEITHER DO I! NEITHER DOES QUAGMIRE, FOR PETE'S SAKE!!!

THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT RIGHT THERE

[JDodge]

go scot go

[JDodge]

This Quagwagon reeks of opportunism from some of its less vocal members like d3sisted and Max.

[JDodge]

i find it ironic how in trying to prevent unnecessary deaths we're rushing someone to the gallows

[JDodge]

i find it ironic how in trying to prevent unnecessary deaths we're rushing someone to the gallows

I find it odd how you insist on defending him in this manner.

Please. Tell us how our case/judgment is flawed.

It's hypocritical. Let's prevent people from refusing to prevent a lynch by lynching them!

[JDodge]

There is no reason that a town shouldn't stump. It is in our favour that we prevent as many lynches as possible, as we have the alternative of stumping, which is what we're doing. I agree with you that I would much rather have Quagmire stumped than lynched, but because scum will be refusing to stump, we have no other choice but to lynch hm.

Anyway, I think I ought to

unvote

to prevent a self-lynch.

As an aside, what do suggest we do to get rid of Quagmire, or at least get him to cooperate?

Personally I suggest we actually scumhunt for a while and find an alternative to Quag - for now. We can always come back to Quag tomorrow or later today if nothing else pans out.

The whole case on Quag is that he's supposedly scum for not wanting to stump, when (from his position, having not opened his role PM yet) is indeed the second most optimal play besides opening your role PM when you are near lynch to see whether you should stump or not. Furthermore, you have no real basis to say he is scum - just basis to call for his head. I see no point to lynching someone without any reason to think said person is scum since it's contrary to the town goal of eliminating mislynches.

[JDodge]

Unvote, vote: d3sisted

The Quagmire wagon is driven by two things IMO - a so-called "policy lynch" which is hypocritical but not necessarily scummy, and the opportunists like d3sisted and Max who just want a lynch so they can make use of one of their very few possible nightkill attempts. I'm willing to bet SP is the third scum, too, but the case on d3sisted compels me.

[JDodge]

I think the opportunist here is you, JDodge.
The only reason you would be so sure that Quagmire is town, is if you're scum. Building upon that, you're making this pre-emptive strike so as to setup tomorrow's mislynch after this one goes down.

No, I'm not sure that he's town or scum. I'm sure that there is no

actual suspicion

of Quagmire being scum aside from the people who now think that he has read his role PM, which I have yet to see any evidence substantiating. And I think you believe the same thing and are trying to push the lynch while staying as below-the-radar as possible.

[JDodge]

OK, so we got lucky on D1. I still think that Quag had not looked at his role PM.

I agree that Korlash's hammer is odd, but I'm not entirely sold on his being scum yet.

[JDodge]

JDodge: part of the Adele hatewagon, supported quag to the extent of voting silverphoenix and d3sisted (two of the easier-to-attack quaghaters), defended quagmire passionately on the ground that his allocation was still Schrodinger-tacular. If he'd had his way, Quagmire would be alive at least until we'd caught another scum, and maybe by then we'd've forgotten about him.

Please, refresh my memory; what was the case for Quag being scum that

cannot be explained by him not reading his role PM

?

[JDodge]

What's the case for

anyone

being scum that

cannot be explained by them being townie playing badly?

The fact that something

can

, potentially, explain something doesn't mean it's anywhere near sufficient, and Quag was misbehaving on

several

levels.

This is probably not going to be anything we can prove or disprove either way, so why don't we just consider it a different viewpoint.

Once more:

1. Early random bandwagon encouragement
2. Refusing to treestump over getting lynched
3. Not answering questions straight (and, if your counterargument to something is wifomable, then that does reflect on the quality of the counterargument)
4. Appearing to expect a free pass due to not checking role.

5. Plus generally making an arse of himself and annoying everyone, which can jam peoples' scumdars

By-the-by, the fact that I've now had to post that list 3 times?

Big

part of my suspicion of quaglovas. This didn't come out of nowhere. There have been

loads

of posts in this game stating

several

good reasons why quag needed to die, and certain people have been stubbornly ignoring them.

Now's the time to stop ignoring them, accept you were wrong, and move on.

1. You're fingering him for bandwagoning

randomly

early in the game?

2. Is the best play if you haven't read your role PM

3. Examples please

4. His lynch was not smart, it was lucky.

5. Being an arse =/= being scum

I don't like that last sentence, either. Something about "accept you were wrong" feels off.

Vote: SilverPhoenix

[JDodge]

1. You're fingering him for bandwagoning randomly early in the game?

2. Is the best play if you haven't read your role PM

3. Examples please

4. His lynch was not smart, it was lucky.

5. Being an arse =/= being scum

I don't like that last sentence, either. Something about "accept you were wrong" feels off.

Vote: SilverPhoenix

What? After that long drawn-out tirade against Adele you vote for me? Is that a mistake or do you actually have a case against me?

Adele doesn't seem like scum, you do. I'm pretty sure I outlined why yesterday.

[JDodge]

2. Is the best play if you haven't read your role PM

Also I am 57% sure that Quag was lying when he claimed neutrality. How are you so sure he didn't read his role PM?

You're making the claims, it's your job to prove them

[JDodge]

Vote: d3sisted

[JDodge]

Horribly early stump, but I'm glad at least someone sees what I see.

Vote jdodoge

This is not OMOGUS in any way

[JDodge]

my reasons have changed somewhat

[JDodge]

Eventually, but for now I want to see more before I disclose said reasons.

[JDodge]

scotmany12, do you believe JDodge is innocent? Why or why not?

JDodge, do you believe scotmany12 is innocent? Why or why not?

No. I could go either way.

General feeling, mostly is my reasoning.

Sorry Adele, want a bit more content before I give my reasons.

[JDodge]

Long posts are bad.

5-6 long posts are worse.

5-6 long posts consecutively with terrible logic are a violation of the Geneva convention.

In other words - I despise long posts and terrible logic, and your taking those and

multiplying them

by 5-6 is horrible

[JDodge]

JDodge:

Post 12:

Assumes he read his role PM and would thus know who his scumbuddies were.

Post 33:

Damn, I'm so scummy for random voting

Post 70:

LYNCHING PEOPLE WITHOUT SOLID REASONING THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT THEY ARE SCUM IS BAD.

BAD

.

BAD.

We got lucky with Quag. Nothing more.

Post 86:

A) It gets rid of a person creating unneeded hinderances to the town.
B) He is more or less the most obviously suspicious person at the time
C) He keeps disobeying orders that he is given

by a majority of the town

D) It is a lot better then wanting someone lynched on a basis of nothing.. which is about all you have had this entire game… (So far XD)

A) It gets rid of someone who could

just as well be town playing poorly

. Lynching town in a setup where lynching is bad is, in general,

BAD

.

Same Post:

...

Same post:

Are you being intentionally dense?

Post 90:

Ow my context

And no one should play neutral. You should in fact PLAY TOWN no matter what side you are on. (see above point) Both town and mafia players alike benefit from appearing “Pro-town” and so to play neutral is idiotic. So being unreadable = being dangerous. And being dangerous and NOT STUMPING = scum. As proven already. Or that’s my take on it. You being scum of course makes you semi biased right? :p

No, your goal as a mafia player should be to not give off any tells indicative of you being scum/town/SK/cult/survivor/lyncher/jester/whatever. That is what I mean by neutral.

Being unreadable is indeed dangerous.

Lynching people for it is more dangerous.

No what do you see? Seriously I stared at it for like 3 minutes and cannot see what yoru talking about.. or more… not talking about… STOP IT! I would not be surprised if I hammered you for the exact same reasons I did Quag.. You annoy, confuse, and piss me off at the same time…

Why do you want to hammer people?

Post 91: ~FIXED~

It's called

fixing your punctuation

. Most people with a basic grasp of the English language would know that it takes it from its original statement form to its intended form.

Post 101:

Are you being intentionally dense?

Post 105:

Yeah... It is so anti-town to agree in a fashion that keeps with my sense of humour

Post 154:

HOW THE HELL

IS GOING AFTER PEOPLE FOR OPPORTUNISM

OPPORTUNISM?

Post 169:

i find it ironic how in agreeing with me you prove yourself a hypocrite

Post 172:

And the world record for quickest flip-flop has just been broken! You agree with me above, but when I restate it, you disagree!

Like magic

.

Post 174:

R.I.P Logic, beginning of intelligent life - November 4th, 2007

Pot 180:

HOW THE HELL IS ME DISAGREEING WITH SOMEONE WHO I'M SCUM WITH FOR "BUDDYING UP TO THEM" SCUMMY?

Post 182:

AGAIN, I AM ASSUMING HE DID NOT READ HIS ROLE PM.

Post 203:

Allow me to be the first to say "f*** you".

Post 209:

1. Not stupid
2. I don't think Adele is scum. Which you would realize if you look at the next post.

Post 211:

Because SP was acting scummy

And I didn't want to lynch him, I wanted to stump him

Post 215:

Not advice, it's called burden of proof. I don't want to present a case, that's my problem. I admit it.

Post 253:

...

Quit assuming that not giving a reason = not having a reason

Post 257:

The easiest way to respond to this is just to say "you're an idiot".

Post 259:

*snip*

Absolutely no pro town reason for this…

So thus, not being pro town, I want you dead…

CALLING DR. FREUD

Post 272:

my not having a read on someone is so scummy

Ok thats about it on him... I would like to iterate here that I kinda became a little bias against both JD and Scot this game and some of my attacks became a bit to personal and I deeply apologize for them. I will outline my stupid MoS/Adele partnership idea next...

hi scum

[JDodge]

i'm going to work on giving the reasons on d3sisted at some point today

[JDodge]

Tell me then, Korlash...

WHY THE FUCK

ARE YOU GOING AFTER ME AND SCOT

FOR THINKING THE EXACT SAME YOU WERE THINKING?

[JDodge]

predetermined random vote = cheating?

[JDodge]

We need a mass stumpage up in here, starting with scotmany.

Why do you want to drastically lower the number of town?

Oh, right, you're scum. I almost forgot.

[JDodge]

Right. Scum is sacrificing himself to take out 1 town. Nice...

assumes you were actually going to stump

[JDodge]

Right. Scum is sacrificing himself to take out 1 town. Nice...

assumes you were actually going to stump

Then policy lynch me if i refuse to stump.[/quote

Because you want your buddy to be able to kill another townie

[JDodge]

Because you want your buddy to be able to kill another townie

How would that work exactly?

We lynch due to refusal to stump, scum gets a NK

[JDodge]

...er, are you seriously arguing that it's a *bad* thing for us to lynch scum who refuse to stump?

No. I'm not.

I'm arguing that he could have - feasibly - been trying to trick scot into stumping.

[JDodge]

Scotmany, why are you purposefully ignoring my proposal?
You do know what happened to the last guy who refused to stump, right?

This is why you are scum

[JDodge]

Scotmany, why are you purposefully ignoring my proposal?
You do know what happened to the last guy who refused to stump, right?

you're threatening a lynch on the basis of refusal to stump of someone with two votes.

this is why you're scum

[JDodge]

Knowing d3sisted, I'm leaning towards scum

[JDodge]

=D And I am at the center of it! I feel all warm and cuddly for some reason.. if only Pooky was here...

As the official Huggle Alliance representative in this game... *huggles*

clearly this is an outside the game influence

CHEATER

[JDodge]

Oh, right. d3sisted case. Almost forgot.

But nevertheless, let's withhold from lynching and give him some time to check his role. If he continues to refuse to stump or check his role, by all means hammer. Until then, this game will stand in a stalemate.

I dislike the way this statement commands the town. This'll also come back later.

Personally I think he is lying and trying to buy time, but I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Reasons?

Anyway, I think I ought to

unvote

to prevent a self-lynch.

As an aside, what do suggest we do to get rid of Quagmire, or at least get him to cooperate?

Weren't you just eager to lynch? One can interpret this in two ways - townie who doesn't want a lynch, or scum who doesn't want his buddy lynched.

I think the opportunist here is you, JDodge.
The only reason you would be so sure that Quagmire is town, is if you're scum. Building upon that, you're making this pre-emptive strike so as to setup tomorrow's mislynch after this one goes down.

When did I ever say Quag = town?

I think what we're forgetting here is that I was THE first person to vote quagmire in the entire game, on the basis of his refusal to comply with our strategy. Hence I stand by my statement that I had pushed for Quagmire's lynch since the very beginning.

Except you realized how much of a disadvantage to you the bussing would be midway through and unvoted with the qualifier of "I don't want him to self-lynch".

You and JDodge, however, were indifferent to this blatant defiance, and in essence adverse to the idea of town voluntarily stumping at L-2, tantamount to Quagmire-scum's mentality.

WHAT. THE. HELL.

I never ONCE said that I was against town stumping. I said that I believed Quag when he said he had not read his role PM.

1) Followed Quagmire on Adele with absolutely no support whatsoever (does "I do not see him providing any substantial information." ring a bell?). Moreover, seeing as you followed a confirmed scum, I think we can safely assume Adele is town; therefore, you hunted a town.
Now, I know what you're going to say: "BUT BUT THAT WAS ME RANDOM VOTE QQ!!" To this, I'll respond:

hey jdodge, scotmany:

instead of bandwagoning and trying to lynch mos, do you want to go for adele instead? she's really stupid and recent events show that she would be just as worthwile a "principle lynching" as mos...

Do you expect us to believe this statement by Quagmire had no influence on your vote whatsoever?

How the hell do you get Adele-town out of that?

And OF COURSE THE STATEMENT HAD AN INFLUENCE. It does not mean that the bandwagon was non-random.

2) Continuing, you voted SilverPhoenix, who as we all know is now a confirmed town.

Because townies

never

vote other townies, especially ones who are playing poorly.

We need a mass stumpage up in here, starting with scotmany.

How is this in any way good for the town?

In fact, scotmany I'll make you a deal: if you stump right now, and turn up town, I will immediately stump myself.

Assuming you're town, why do you want to possibly take out 2 townies?

Then policy lynch me if i refuse to stump.

Ah, so you do want to take someone else down with you.

Scotmany, why are you purposefully ignoring my proposal?
You do know what happened to the last guy who refused to stump, right?

How the hell is that refusal to stump?

It doesn't, but refusing to stump is reminiscent of Quagmire.

Who, I'd like to add, turned out scum.

Again, how the hell is that refusal to stump? And I dislike this little "QUAG WAS SCUM BTW" comment.

Sorry for the general lack of quality this afternoon

[JDodge]

DGB, seeing as Aimee is scummy for being outside of your so-called conflicts, why is Adele your number 2 suspect and not me?

[JDodge]

Scot/JD- My scum pair... aren't they cute.. all about to die and stuff... Unfortunately I believe a lot of my stuff is traced back to their stupid team AH or something... I don't know much about it... But it apparently makes people stupid in mafia games. While I feel they are scum I also feel I am ignoring a lot of the more important stuff going on.

So much ignorance...

[JDodge]

Sure... take the you stump I stump thing. I don't think a mafia would do something so dumb as that. A) As you see people jumped on him for even suggesting it. B) If he did stump and D3s refused it would have been a 1:1 trade off.. a very bad thing for mafia... Or that is my take on it. He more or less seems to have the exact same thoughts I do at times and so I keep getting the town vibe because of that. Sure I could be mistaken, I could be mistaken on you and JD too. But i am stubborn and egotistical and so I assume I am always right! ^^

That's a lovely personality trait to have

[JDodge]

I could potentially go for a DGB wagon, based on the way she's associating with Korlash

[JDodge]

I said I could go for you. Not now, but if necessary. I want to wait until I am absolutely sure before pushing you to stump.

[JDodge]

Come on JDodge. I've got the stumpage magic formula copied and pasted into Notepad. I am just itching to use it. Come on JDodge. Make me stump.

Are you going to be the one?

And then, later in the game, you'll be at LYLO, and you'll be stuck with Miss Aimee here playing you all for fools. "Oh, I can't pressure her, she's hardly posted, she can't possibly be scummy!"

Quit trying to bait me into it.

[JDodge]

Vote: d3sisted

This is saddening

[JDodge]

You stumped when you didn't have to, man.

He sure did stump when he didn't have to; but you knew he would stump the second he heard the whiz of a chain saw in the distance. 'Specially if you are scum.

Technically, since he's now a tree

stump

and all, wouldn't he have

picked

the chain saw?

[JDodge]

JDodge - I still don't like his arguments against d3sisted, his easy support for the DGB wagon, and how earlier he said both Max and d3sisted looked bad on the Quag wagon and then switched to saying that it was mostly d3sisted that was scummy for it instead of both.

Heeey, you know who DGB replaced? Max!

You know who I thought was scummy, and you even said so just now? Max!

You know who I supposedly have "easily supported the wagon of"? DGB! Who replaced Max!

Where did I ever say that it was mostly d3sisted?

[JDodge]

wow i totally did not expect DGB to buddy up to the confirmed innocent

[JDodge]

What buddying up to the confirmed innocent? Or do you mean continuing to be buddies AFTER I confirmed my alignment. Or would you rather she buddy up to me while I am unknown, see I am town, then stop being my buddy?

Or are you and your partner JD suddenly feeling the heat and rummaging around for any excuse stupid believable enough to pass by this already proven moronic town?

O.o *Evil eye*

No, I'd rather she not answer to your beck and call; doing so allows her to A.) hide behind your reasoning, and B.) look more townie by following a confirmed townie around.

[JDodge]

Sorry, was having slight access issues; rereading through what I missed

[JDodge]

Mmk, a simple question.

Mith, why do you think I am scum?

I agree that Adele is town.

I will stump if there is enough demand;

however

, I would like to stress that we must be careful with how many people stump. We have 3 stumps left - let's not waste them.

If forced to give a scumpair, I would say that DGB's most recent posts have me wavering on my guess that she is scum; I

still

don't like her buddying up to confirmed innocents, but at the moment I can see one of (Aimee, MoS, and even possibly scot) as scumpartner of d3sisted.

[JDodge]

Some of JD's posts are pretty scummy; I've never been fond of his play, but his most recent post reads as a pre-emptive defence of excuses for putting off stumping as long as possible, and I don't like the question aimed only at mith, rather than deal with the feelings of the town at large (I'm worried that he's trying either to discredit mith, who's said that he's not quite on form recently, or convince mith to change his mind and push the "town should follow mith" angle, although that last one's probably just my paranoia - the issues in play don't seem at the forefront of his mind).

It was a mere statement of fact, and I would indeed like to put off

anyone

stumping for as long as possible. Although I realize now rereading that how you could get that tone; I blame the subconcious instinct of self-preservation for that.

I am asking mith because at the moment I only desire his response and no one else's. I am neither trying to discredit nor push the "follow mith" angle, mostly because I don't believe the "follow _____" angle helps anyone.

[JDodge]

JDodge, can you summarize your case on d3sisted for me?

Didn't I do so a few pages ago? Or at least at the start of the day? Take that and add the sudden lurking to it.

Oh... It's JD again? coming in at just the right time to redo his vote... Lurk much...!?!?!?!?

Seriously, to be honest I think this proves he is watching but not commenting at all. you would think he would have had SOMETHING to say against/about/for/whatever me in the last 2 pages... But no.... nothing...

Fair point. JDodge, anything to say for yourself? Did you see the Korlash argument? If so, what were your thoughts and why did you not contribute them?

I don't think JDodge ever actually answered that question. JDodge?

Of course I see what Korlash means; I did sort of pop out of nowhere. But as I said, I've had access issues as well as being

incredibly

busy recently.

DGB, how do you feel about scotmany and d3sisted, individually?

Scotmany12 makes no sense whatsoever. I disagree with all his conclusions. d3sisted... I dunno. Supporting cast I guess.

Why do you care about my opinion? Are you trying to distract from the JDodge thing? Or are you trying to get more ammo so that you can reach the same foregone conclusion you're reaching in every game, that is, I am scum in every game?

I

really

don't like this post. Still no committal either way on scot and d3sisted's alignments. Second paragraph I hate even more; how is going off on something else for a couple moments and actively hunting scum "trying to distract from the JDodge thing"?

Impossible for DGB to be my scum partner if I'm not scum.

this is a helpful post with riveting content

[JDodge]

Responses coming when I have the time; either late tonight, tomorrow or Friday.

[JDodge]

Still don't have time at the moment, but I would like for Korlash to state his case on me in an

objective, factual

fashion as opposed to the mostly-fluff case he's been presenting thus far.

[JDodge]

Yay! JDodge! Just tell us what you've done that's pro-town.

I find that the person least qualified to answer "what have you done that is pro-town" is the person who you're regarding.

[JDodge]

Yay! JDodge! Just tell us what you've done that's pro-town.

I find that the person least qualified to answer "what have you done that is pro-town" is the person who you're regarding.

That's the kind of purposely evasive response that makes me more comfortable with my vote.

*shrug* I just don't feel that self-analysis does anything for the town. Just adds to the confusion.

[JDodge]

I like how there are 3 scum in your list and only 2 scum left

that's great

[JDodge]

is JDodge's playstyle based upon appearing scummy in every game he plays in?

my playstyle is usually based around quiet observation and later use of my gut

i tried a different approach to this game because of its odd mechanics; as is such, i have managed to look scummy above and beyond my norm

[JDodge]

I'm tempted to stump right now just to prove you wrong. And then I could sit here and laugh in your faces as you wonder how you lost sight of the true scum. And then I would remember that you never lost sight, because you are the scum.

I get it now. The scum is not d3sisted; it is DGB and scot. I am sorry that I did not see this before; but now I have found clarity.

Unvote, vote: scotmany12

Scot is following me because he knows me to be town; he wants to set me up to take the fall and DGB is helping him with setting up an alibi for him later. DGB's buddying up to confirmed innocents as well as helping scot out in this way tells all.

So the question is this: should I stump?

[JDodge]

I'm tempted to stump right now just to prove you wrong. And then I could sit here and laugh in your faces as you wonder how you lost sight of the true scum. And then I would remember that you never lost sight, because you are the scum.

Ya'know... that paragraph just doesn't sound genuine.

It isn't. I'd written something a

lot

angrier, but I decided before I signed up that I wouldn't make any seethingly angry rants; so I threw that out and opted for a more restrained, mechanical response.

I get it now. The scum is not d3sisted; it is DGB and scot. I am sorry that I did not see this before; but now I have found clarity.

This looks like some last ditch effort to cause confusion. Very weak attempt, and very odd choice of players.

It is odd; but you cannot deny that while you keep bringing up me + scot, you've been focusing on me and leaving scot by the wayside. It's less of a logical inconsistency that makes me link you two in my mind; more of a

tonal

inconsistency.

Unvote, vote: scotmany12

Scot is following me because he knows me to be town; he wants to set me up to take the fall and DGB is helping him with setting up an alibi for him later.

IF you're town... then scotmany12 is probably scum, if you follow my argument.

That's like, the opposite of an alibi.

I'm not so sure I know what you mean by this statement. From my standpoint, I

know

myself to be town; thus from

my

perspective, it would mean that scot is likely (I never really consider myself certain these days) scum.

I'll likely get to the rest this afternoon.

[JDodge]

So the question is this: should I stump?

DO NOT STUMP.

Called your bluff, did I? You push my lynch, push my lynch, push my lynch, I offer to stump and.... WHOA LET'S NOT GO SO FAST HERE.

I really dislike that.

Still don't have time at the moment, but I would like for Korlash to state his case on me in an objective, factual fashion as opposed to the mostly-fluff case he's been presenting thus far.

*pulls a page out of JD's book"

I already did that like.. 14 pages ago.. Not to mention at least three people have asked you the same question in the last 2 pages you have still not answered.. so... No... Anyone who cannot present their own case when asked does not deserve the case against them presented. Show me a case on D3sisted and I'll think about not doing anything you say... scum...

No, that was the mostly-fluff version. I am looking for

exactly what you find scummy

, not what your

opinion on said material is

.

Right. Now for the self-defense.

Well, assuming I understand the case on me correctly, the three main points were that I was:

1. Against the Quagmire lynch
   
2. For a SilverPhoenix lynch/stumping
   
3. A possible pair between me and scot
   
4. For a Korlash lynch/stumping.

I'll answer these one-by-one.

First, the Quagmire lynch; I still stand by my assertion that in lynching him, we got

lucky

. There really is a very large chance that he could have been town, and we

still

have no proof that he read his role PM. I still don't see how anyone could make the assumption that he hadn't. Thus, I must say that I am not in any way remorseful for defending someone that we now know to be scum; in that same position, I would do the same thing every time as town. I will not attempt to deduce what I would've done in that position as scum; I am mediocre at self-analysis, and even worse at predicting what I would have done in a theoretical situation. What you will notice, however, was that whilst I personally was against the Quagmire lynch, it was more due to me wanting us to actually use D1 to hunt for scum a bit, as evidenced by this quote:

Personally I suggest we actually scumhunt for a while and find an alternative to Quag - for now.

We can always come back to Quag tomorrow or later today if nothing else pans out.

I was advocating that we actually do something instead of playing the lottery and potentially putting us at a greater disadvantage than we needed to be at.

Second, the SilverPhoenix stumping; I also stand behind everything I said there as well. I truly believe everything I said.

Next, the potential connection, I (until fairly recently) was somewhat going d3sisted solely. As is such, I cast most of my other suspicions off as nothing; something that I now greatly regret. So if there were any tells being given off by scot, I was blinded to them.

As for the Korlash wagon, I (yet again) stand by what I said. His poor logic tricked me to some extent; his single-mindedness (I know this is going to sound hypocritical due to the last paragraph) made me truly think he was going for where the easy-to-go after people. Now I realize that he is (sorry) just in general someone whose playstyle is terrible.

Phew. Remind me to never think "I'm going to try being a little more verbose" again.

[JDodge]

Adel: The reason you can't come up with a defense of me is because there

is

no defense for me. I was wrong, and nothing more; and people are using that against me more than my other actions.

[JDodge]

What were you wrong about?

SilverPhoenix. You. Most likely d3sisted. Oh, and there was the Quag thing, but I wasn't really

wrong

technically, more

naive

I suppose.

[JDodge]

Sick and busy. Will post content soon, but not now.

[JDodge]

1. Obviously, the first thing that has to come up is the day 1 play, and his defense of Quag. There's not much to say there.

Addressed already with my last post.

2. Comparing JDodge's posts and scotmany12's day 1, scotmnay12 comes off as far more genuine while they are saying mostly the same things. I've said this multiple times before, and I'm not sure I can explain it. It's just a feel thing. I suggest everyone read through the two of them and form their own opinions.

I decided to try and put a bit more feeling behind my posts in this game. It came off as a bit less genuine than I thought it would.

3. The vote for SP is a bit odd. I can't really fault him for the act of voting SP - I thought he was scum, myself - but it's the way he went about it. He argued with Adele in that post, and said nothing about SP at all. When SP asked him about this, he said: "Adele doesn't seem like scum, you do. I'm pretty sure I outlined why yesterday." And that's fine too, except that he ended the day on d3sisted, not SP.

Yes, I did end the day on d3sisted; however, by the time D2 had started, I felt that SP was a more worthy pursuit. My response to Adele was my way of responding to her points about Quag.

4. Then, once SP was dead, he immediately voted for d3sisted again. And stalled for a long time on giving his reasons for his vote.

Meh. To be entirely honest, I forgot my reasons after I found d3sisted to be scummy - I knew there was something there, I just couldn't remember exactly what it is. The delay was half due to me having to go back and *find* the reasons and half due to my own laziness, to be entirely honest.

5. ...ok, his post responding to Korlash is just annoying. Almost as annoying as Korlash's series of posts. I might try to read through them later, but it feels like a waste of time at the moment. Two players making snarky comments at each other - not even

funny

snarky comments - is not my idea of a good time.

Well, I see 3 glaring faults in my responses looking back at it: less actual response, more ad hom, and poor formatting.

6. As for his reasons on d3sisted... he does make a couple of good points. The unvote from d3sisted was definitely odd, and d3sisted does misinterpret JDodge's stance on things.

There's not a whole lot there, though. It's a long post with little substance - just lots of how the hell" and "what the hell" and "why" questions.

I agree. There isn't a whole lot there. I got myself into a full-on "d3sisted is scum" state of mind and tried to find fault in every little detail.

7. The "I could potentially go for a DGB wagon" comment bothers me a lot if DGB is innocent (and right now, I think she is).

Meh. I stand by what I said. Even if it could've been said a bit better.

8. This post is quite interesting. A quick search shows he mentioned Max

twice

Day 1:

"This Quagwagon reeks of opportunism from some of its less vocal members like d3sisted and Max."

"The Quagmire wagon is driven by two things IMO - a so-called "policy lynch" which is hypocritical but not necessarily scummy, and the opportunists like d3sisted and Max..."

That's it. That's the list. He voted for d3sisted and argued with him quite a bit, but aside from those two comments said nothing about Max. His DGB wagon comment (see 7.) came a couple weeks into Day 2, with no mention whatsoever of her replacing Max, or any carryover at all from Day 1.

(Bumping up the possibility of a JDodge/DGB pairing slightly for that.)

Meh. Again, more a part of my one-sided pursuit of d3sisted.

[JDodge]

Note: I start thinking scot is scum, and scot starts thinking I'm scum. Like

magic

. And apparently it's for thinking d3sisted and Max were being opportunists.

[JDodge]

Er, yes, you were one-sided. Except that's not at all what you said in the post I linked. My point/question in 8 is: how does your obvious one-sidedness fit with post 705?

That was more me trying to explain that I had already expressed suspicion of DGB previously than anything. I'm not entirely sure what you mean here.

On 3, yeah, I got that.

Why

did you feel SP was a more worthy pursuit? What changed from the end of day 1 to the beginning of day 2?

I can't remember what exactly changed my mind. Sorry.

Adele, essentially what I'm saying is that I realize that I was wrong, but I still stand by what I said; I'm not going to fabricate some excuse for my actions when I still firmly believe they were justified. Does this change your question thereafter? I'd like to know before I answer that.

Unvote

for safety

[JDodge]

Vote: scotmany12

then.

[JDodge]

Note: I start thinking scot is scum, and scot starts thinking I'm scum. Like

magic

. And apparently it's for thinking d3sisted and Max were being opportunists.

What? I never said you were scum, I said you were a possibility. I didn't even mention you and desisted and max in the same sentence. The only thing I accused you off was going from being so sure of desisted to being so sure of me, which is why I no longer believe you can no not be desisted's partner.

Yes, but you did suddenly become suspicious at a rather odd time; furthermore, you cited post 180, which is me calling d3sisted and Max opportunists. Don't lie.

[JDodge]

Sorry, I'm having a hard time keeping up with this and a couple other games at the moment. I'll post either later today, tomorrow or worst-case scenario on Friday.

[JDodge]

Vote: The Fonz

[JDodge]

Unvote

4 to lynch. Bleh.

[JDodge]

JDodge - Whose vote for scot seemed at the time to be a rather lame last gasp effort from a scum to shift the focus to someone else, though I guess it wasn't that lame since it seems to have worked. Another question for JDodge: You voted for scot on the basis of a DGB/scot pairing. Why did you vote scot instead of DGB (who, I believe, had more votes at the time)?

I felt more confident in scot than I did in DGB.

How secure was your conviction that Quag had not looked at his pm? If there's even a 10% chance he had, that puts the odds of him being scum way above the odds of hitting scum with a random lynch. Therefore, 'claiming to not have looked at the pm' IS SCUMMY, ESPECIALLY when you consider what Quag was doing constituted not reading your pm and assuming you're scum, at best. Flying blind is intolerable enough at the best of times, doing so in a game where it could end D1 is even worse, (and arguing that he'd have looked overnight hence even scummier) and not 'assuming you're town' which should be the MINIMUM standard for one claiming not to have read is Ootw scummy.

I still have not seen one compelling argument that says he read his role PM, and based on similar behaviour in other games I feel even more confident now. It was a random lynch. I still believe that and stand by that.

JDodge, why do you think scotmany's been following you when you clearly differed in opinion at times, and you both had plenty of reason to individually suspect d3sisted (even if I don't agree)?

I'm not seeing this clear differing in opinion.

Question for you: someone pretty consistently defends scum, attacks town, and when pulled up for it, degenerates to... "making snarky comments". Do you:
a) think that person is scum
b) think that person is town

So much of this depends on meta as well as the context of the situation. In a vacuum, I'd probably pick A to be entirely truthful.

What did you see?

That seems like scum trying to shut up a dumb-ass scum partner to me.

This part jumped out at me and made me think he had more info than he should have.

JDodge: Still hasn't answered my points fully,

What

haven't I answered fully?

Sorry for the delays, I keep falling behind on this game.

[JDodge]

checking in, need to post, will get to it soon

[JDodge]

I will get around to posting soon - things have been rather hectic lately and I haven't had the time to sit down and get caught up yet again.

[JDodge]

I'm sorry. I should've asked to be replaced ages ago due to time constraints, but now that I have the time, it seems to be too late anyways - and it seems rather unfair to just have some new person come in to this situation anyways, so...

I didn't want this role. I wanted to be a Lumberjack! Leaping from tree to tree!

Now let's lynch Fonz-scum, k?

[JDodge]

becuase I'd like to add to this discussion, but I need the credibility of being a stump, and voting for who I think is scum should help get my wagon going pretty quick.

If you truly wanted the credibility of being a stump, why wouldn't you stump now?

[JDodge]

(Can we please please please stop encouraging people to stump prematurely? We've had more than enough of that in this game, and we have very little room for error.

Unless you're scum, Adel. Then, stump away.)

I'm not trying to; I'm pointing out her blatant lie which seems to me like a scum's desperate final attempts.

[JDodge]

...

Let's try again. Why do you think The Fonz is scum?

As scot said, we only have one stump left to give. And it hurts us a lot if we have to use it now. (We're still at 50-50 tomorrow if we hit scum now, but we're down to 2/15 if we miss.)

Major reason:
DGB requested replacement in this game while under heavy fire... MoS defended her at the time saying that she was replacing out of all of her games... she is still active in 1+ games

now

that she was active in

before

then.

Listening to the Fonz got me into trouble, that and forgetting to vet my previous posts for consistency...

It's true though - I can affirm this because she was in 2 of the games I was modding at the time, and she asked for replacement in both.

I'm feeling pretty outclassed by the other living players right now.

I know the feeling. I had the same issue - I think the main reason behind my lack of posting was some sort of subconscious performance anxiety; this caused me to lurk to my doom. But I must say, you can't just give up. You're a good, logical player who knows what you're doing - I'm sure if you could pull yourself out of this lull you seem to have dropped yourself into, you'd be fine.

[JDodge]

There's a strong feeling that the stumps, as a rule, are less logical and make worse decisions than living players - as evidenced by them either stumping unnecessarily or garnering the suspicion of most of the town (for example, I think

every

living player and at least on treestump favoured JDodge stumping; now we're supposed to trust his judgement?)

And you were all wrong; now you're supposed to trust your own judgment?

[JDodge]

And you were all wrong; now you're supposed to trust your own judgment?

You yourself were on the scot and SP stumps, if not the Korlash one as well, I can't remember. So just because you're now a stump doesn't make your judgement better than those of us that are protown. But that's not really the main point anyways.

I'm not really comfortable with taking away the responsibility of the lynch from the living players. I'm afraid the mafia will manipulate the stumps into mislynching. Then, the blame for the mislynch goes on the dead players who can't possibly be scum, and the mafia get away scot-free because they were just following the orders of the confirmed protown players. Personally, I do not mind the equal voting we had earlier that much, but I felt that my suggestion was a compromise that gives everyone something they want. The Fonz gets less power to the stumps to address his concerns, and the stumps still get real votes to represent them, even if they don't mean *as* much.

It does not make my judgment any worse, either.

How are stumps any more susceptible to manipulation by scum than the townies are? Why would anyone just let someone off because they were "just doing what the confirmed townies asked"?

[JDodge]

How are stumps any more susceptible to manipulation by scum than the townies are? Why would anyone just let someone off because they were "just doing what the confirmed townies asked"?

They're not more susceptible, but they aren't accountable for their actions. Stumps cannot be held accountable for the decisions they make, so there is less pressure to be correct or thorough. Living players can and will be held accountable.

I would say that is an even

better

reason to listen to the stumps; any player (be it on a conscious or subconscious level) wants to avoid getting lynched, and will thus (be it of choice or of pure gut instinct) choose the viewpoint that is most beneficial to their survival. Usually for scum/neutral roles they will act on the conscious level, town will normally act on the subconscious level.

JD, let's look at a theoretical situation. Let's say that mith and Adele are scum together. Let's say that Adele attacks The Fonz and convinces the stumps to vote him, while mith says he thinks it's MoS and Adel. By Glork's plan, mith is obliged to follow the stump votes and force The Fonz to stump, but he has no accountability for that action, because he didn't *want* to lynch The Fonz, but he had to because he had agreed to give the stumps the majority voice, which lets them direct his vote. How can you discern between scum-mith who is riding the stump decisions and town-mith who just doesn't think The Fonz is town? If he has control over his own destiny, he's responsible for making The Fonz stump if he votes him. I want the living players to be fully accountable for their actions, but I don't want to take away all ability for the confirmed protown players to have their say. With my compromise plan, the living players are still mostly responsible for deciding who dies, but the stumps can exercise their own opinions in the form of 1/2 votes that the town is obliged to honor by agreement. It's harder for scum to hide behind stump votes, because it takes two stump votes to make a living player enforce that view to lynch. Under Glork's plan, 1 stumped person essentially controls two living votes, which makes it easy for scum to hide behind the stumps.

That assumes that the people of the town and the stumps are complete and utter idiots.

We can't have 3 intelligent people and Korlash sharing 2 votes. It just

doesn't work in practice

, and is overall a terrible idea.

[JDodge]

Still here. Still fairly certain The Fonz is scum.

[JDodge]

ah, it was the "lynch the follower first" part that immediately made me cast my vote. It had been something that I had considered, but you laid it out clearly with a bow.

Why?

[JDodge]

I need a reread, so I don't technically have an opinion at the moment.

[JDodge]

EBWOP: Same question to JD.

no clue, hence why i said i needed a reread

i'm not even sure of the fonz enough to really have a pseudovote on him, hence why i didn't pseudovote

[JDodge]

dreadfully sorry I did not get to my reread this weekend - I got incredibly busy. I will try to finish by Thursday, but I've got quite a bit going on this week.

[JDodge]

Korlash, scot/Glork: Stop bitching, even if scot and glork are right.

I do not have time for in-depth analysis, but...

Pseudovote: MoS

[JDodge]

I would like to add that I feel that Adele is scummier than Adel. I'm fairly confident in my ability to read Adel, and she seems

fairly

townish here.

[JDodge]

MoS: better a misstump than a mislynch, no? Stump. Now.

[JDodge]

As much as it pains me to actually agree with someone in this game... I'm afraid MoS should be lynched. Way I see it, either he is scum doing a poor gambit, or he is town that will end up losing us the game and so I feel better about myself. Win/Win in my book...

I'm not going to end up losing the game for us if we lynch Adel instead. It's fairly obvious that she's scum, look how she's now implying that she's willing to vote for me even though she has not presented any case against me or even shown what parts of someone else's case she agrees with.

Because the town has agreed that you are to stump or to die. Do your part or die, scum.

[JDodge]

How about we stop pretending there's any chance of MoS being town and stumping and actually just lynch the guy?

because shockingly enough i don't have a vote, thus i am at least trying on that last little bit to help where i can

[JDodge]

if you are town, i am going to hunt you down and murder you

[JDodge]

Pseudovote: Adele

[JDodge]

Possibly derisive comments MoS made before asking for other people to be "courteous" to him:

(To Korlash)

...hello, logic please? When you find scum, you vote to lynch them. It doesn't matter if it's the first fucking page. You don't just sit around and say "hmm, we need another 8 pages before we can lynch this scum we found!" That's not how the game works. Quagmire is acting like scum, so I'm going to vote for him. Just because he slipped up trying to find a way to act blatantly scummy and get away with it on Page 1, does not mean that we can't lynch him.

(To DGB regarding Quag, myself and scot)

DGB, it's far more compounding the cheating for you to take actions that were based on cheating and analyze them as if they weren't. You're just ruining the game by acting like the actions of cheaters were based on something other than cheating. You're far more guilty of compounding the cheating than anyone else, and I'm not going to stop discussing it until you realize this.

(To DGB)

I'm being stubborn because I refuse to let you make cases off bullshit. You're being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn, as far as I can see. You have no logical basis for not relenting this point. If you think that saying you will be stubborn is going to get me to call of the dogs, think again.

I'm wary of DGB because a game like this strikes me as one where insanity

(as opposed to stupidity, in the case of Quagmire)

could be a highly effective strategy for scum.

(To Adele)

*facepalm*

Does someone else want to field this one? I need to go bash my head into a wall. Excuse me.

(To DGB)

Thank you for playing the semantics game, DGB! I'm sorry, but you haven't won a prize this evening. Charlie, tell her what she would've won! "Well, MoS, the winner this evening would receive a paid cruise to the Bahamas, where they can chillax and try to make sense of their life!" Please come and join us next time, on "Useless arguments that don't really mean anything", hosted by yours truly, MoS!

Respect is a two-way street, MoS.

[JDodge]

And Glork, think whatever you like, but I really think less of you for actually believing I would lie about shit like that. No fucking "meta" is important enough to lie about a game outside the game. Maybe YOU can't forget who your partners are, but YOU don't average 25 games at once, either. When you're playing 25 games at a time, plus an ever-rotating set of newbies while your longer games go on, it's very easy to forget who your partners are, as long as they don't try to contact you during the night. So don't tell me I'm lying to protect some sort of meta. That's ridiculous, and you know me better than that. At least I thought you did.

You're being derisive.

And if you can't remember your role because you play in 25 games at a time, perhaps you should take that as a clue to

play fewer games at a time

.