Mini 535: Pick Your Poison 2 (Game Over!)

Patrick · Post Post #725 (ISO) » Tue Jan 29, 2008 9:21 am

Votecount

YvonneSeer (4) -- Gorrad, Porochaz, Setael, JDodge
Porochaz (5) -- scotmany12, Mizzy, Bookitty, YvonneSeer, JordanA24
Setael (1) -- Ether

Not voting: Lulubelle
11 alive, 6 to lynch.

Mizzy · Post Post #726 (ISO) » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:14 am

scotmany12 wrote:Jordan, I wasn't saying that she shouldn't comment. I would have rather waited to see where jd and lulu went with the whole thing, but we will never know now. Her injecting her opinion at that point ending the whole conversation(if you can call it that) between jd and lulu. I felt like it would be more helpful if she held off commenting until a later point.

Lulu, though, said that she didn't feel there was much else to say and they were just going 'round and 'round in circles. Again, I feel like people are using me as an excuse.

scotmany12 · Post Post #727 (ISO) » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:25 am

Lulu said that after you chimed in. I was interested into how lulu was going to respond to this jd's latest post before you started to question him mizzy. Also, I'm not using you as an excuse, chaz is.

Mizzy · Post Post #728 (ISO) » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:52 am

scotmany12 wrote:Lulu said that after you chimed in. I was interested into how lulu was going to respond to this jd's latest post before you started to question him mizzy. Also, I'm not using you as an excuse, chaz is.

Yes, I know she did; never said otherwise. And actually, the post that I interjected was to get more information out him, not questioning him. I just pointed out that what he was saying was something we already knew in an attempt to get him to open his mouth a little more. Lulu and JD could very well have kept talking in the meantime. My posting, again, doesn't hinder anyone else's and a thread is capable of supporting multiple strains of discussion.

Lulubelle · Post Post #729 (ISO) » Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:15 pm

scotmany12 wrote:Lulu said that after you chimed in.

But it was a response to you and had little, if anything, to do with Mizzy.

scotmany12 wrote:I was interested into how lulu was going to respond to this jd's latest post before you started to question him mizzy.

If there was something that I missed that you would like me to respond to in more detail, you'll have to point it out to me.

Sure are a lot of people voting now. I can see why there's a wagon on Porochaz (which I could be considered a member, although hammering is off my radar for the moment), I'm not getting what Yvonne's done on day two that warrents so many votes. Sure, she did quite a number of questionable things during day one but there's been plenty of game since then. So could someone voting her elaborate a bit on why?

Lulubelle · Post Post #730 (ISO) » Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:39 pm

No takers, huh?

I'm considering dropping the hammer, as it seems like discussion has come to a conclusion for now. Anyone have anything to say?

Porochaz · Post Post #731 (ISO) » Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:44 pm

no please drop it

Mizzy · Post Post #732 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:01 am

Porochaz wrote:no please drop it

So, when you going to start scumhunting now that I'm not "blocking your opportunity to scumhunt beyond my own suspicions?"

Bookitty · Post Post #733 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:05 am

Lulubelle, leaving Porochaz aside for the moment, who are your main suspicions? If you had to vote for someone else, who would it be, right now?

Porochaz · Post Post #734 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:34 am

scotmany12 wrote:I noticed that too mizzy. He subtlety defends gorrad. Like in this post
Porochaz wrote:
YvonneSeer wrote:
Gorrad wrote:I was headstrong and sure of myself. There was no doubt in my mind that Skitzer was lying through his teeth. So I
voted right away without thinking.
Sorry, that is not pro-town. You are scum.
Hmmm... whats that I smell... oh yeah, bullshit.

Not pro-town =/= scum. I love the way you can automatically get scum from the most crappy places. your arguments are worse than the arguments for going into Iraq... Im currently wating for the "your scum because my cat says so" argument... (althought thats probably what skitzer would of said...)

Ok Im posting now... before going any further as Im rereading from about page 15. Things that struck me on the reread so far... page 23... I voted for Yvonne in Day 1, I have been suspicous of her from the start yet as I followed JDodge and Gorrads vote on Yvonne with a vote on Mizzy due to me feeling the three of you (including Lulu) were scum, you feel that I am following them. Mizzy did stop defending Yvonne, for a while, but thats when she started going after me fully and I had to start defending myself. I asked her several times about her alliance and why its good to have an alliance with unknown people, this was never really answered and is now apparently to far in the past to warrant thinking about...

One weird thing, not scummy, was me telling Yvonne that anti town and scum were not the same thing, I got the names mixed up and said Lulu instead and Lulu said "Point taken" even though she had not said anything that would warrant that point being made against her...

Related to that the post above was clearly attacking Yvonne and not really saying anything about Gorrad, I had already mentioned that Gorrad was scummy for doing what he did, why would I change my mind about that suddenly?

Porochaz · Post Post #735 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:00 am

Ok, you(Mizzy) still defend Lulubelle after page 23, when JDodge/Lulu and the fake claim (which interested me a quite a bit), I wasn't involved in that part so I can't say you blocked me from scumhunting however you have been defending them throughout the game. As for the Lulubelle and JDodge thing, I thought it made Lulu look very scummy until JDodge refused to carry on...

I feel at L-1, Im going to be lynched at some point (presumably by Lulu). You are going to throw my theory away as idiotic... however Im going to state it anyway... my current thoughts are that mafia didn't choose the 1 shot mason. That directly contradicts Mizzy/Ether's claim, which would make them incredibly stupid (unlikely) or that their scum. I thought about it a while and I can see it happening, the other 2 power roles do not want to claim currently (and rightly so...) therefore Ether/Mizzy have a free reign with this strategy making them safe. There is nothing in any posts past the claim that makes me think that goes against this.

YvonneSeer has latched onto many arguments, her posting style reminds me of a young girl, and I can confidently say that there is no doubt in my mind that she is scum. Even if my theory about the masons is way off, I feel she could be scum with other players... thats why my vote will remain on Yvonne

Mizzy · Post Post #736 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:03 am

Porochaz wrote:Ok, you(Mizzy) still defend Lulubelle after page 23, when JDodge/Lulu and the fake claim (which interested me a quite a bit), I wasn't involved in that part so I can't say you blocked me from scumhunting however you have been defending them throughout the game. As for the Lulubelle and JDodge thing, I thought it made Lulu look very scummy until JDodge refused to carry on...

I didn't defend Lulu, not one bit. I would have questioned JD's hypocritical play in exactly the same way if he had been targeting ANYONE with it, even YOU, and not just because it was Lulu. I didn't tell him to leave her alone, but what I did do was see if he would do what he was trying to goad her into doing. That's not defending, that's scumhunting.

Porochaz wrote:I feel at L-1, Im going to be lynched at some point (presumably by Lulu). You are going to throw my theory away as idiotic... however Im going to state it anyway... my current thoughts are that mafia didn't choose the 1 shot mason. That directly contradicts Mizzy/Ether's claim, which would make them incredibly stupid (unlikely) or that their scum. I thought about it a while and I can see it happening, the other 2 power roles do not want to claim currently (and rightly so...) therefore Ether/Mizzy have a free reign with this strategy making them safe. There is nothing in any posts past the claim that makes me think that goes against this.

Wow, talk about a last-ditch effort. I can see why you might think that, and I'd question the town's sanity of every one of them didn't wonder at least once...but I also think you're reaching.

Okay, say you're right and we don't have a mason. That leaves us with having a vig, a weak doc, or a strong doc. We got no vig kill last night...granted, a vig wouldn't have to kill, but I doubt they'd hold off. Plus, a vig could claim safely, because the doc would/could protect them. So I can't see why they wouldn't claim. The ONLY power role, in fact, that wouldn't claim due to safety reasons

is the doc

.

Mizzy · Post Post #737 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:16 am

Oh, and

unvote

because I want some responses here.

Bookitty · Post Post #738 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:21 am

Porochaz, I already brought up this possibility and asked that if there were a third power role that was not the doc, that they should claim. No one did so. I take it you're not doing so.

The only other possibility is that the scum gave us both docs and the cop, and neither one of the docs wants to claim because they each think they are the sole doc. That's a possibility, one that the scum would know, but ... why would they risk two people on such a gambit, when the possibility exists that they would kill (or we would lynch) one of the two, and the other would then claim... trading two scums for two docs? It doesn't make good sense. I considered it, and discarded it.

Mizzy did seem to defend Lulubelle. But that doesn't prevent anyone else from saying or doing whatever they want. I think Mizzy's confirmed town, but that doesn't make her infallible, her word unquestioned. I've been fairly quiet because of the situation with the weak doc, but I haven't felt intimidated by anyone really (well, maybe Ether at the start of the game, but that's a playstyle issue I think) and I think no one can prevent you from making your points if you want to. If you feel Mizzy was answering for Lulubelle, tell her to stop it.

Porochaz, leaving YvonneSeer and Lulubelle (and Mizzy and Ether) aside for a moment, who do you think of the rest of us is most likely to be scum, and why?

Porochaz · Post Post #739 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:30 am

Mizzy wrote:
Porochaz wrote:Ok, you(Mizzy) still defend Lulubelle after page 23, when JDodge/Lulu and the fake claim (which interested me a quite a bit), I wasn't involved in that part so I can't say you blocked me from scumhunting however you have been defending them throughout the game. As for the Lulubelle and JDodge thing, I thought it made Lulu look very scummy until JDodge refused to carry on...
I didn't defend Lulu, not one bit. I would have questioned JD's hypocritical play in exactly the same way if he had been targeting ANYONE with it, even YOU, and not just because it was Lulu. I didn't tell him to leave her alone, but what I did do was see if he would do what he was trying to goad her into doing. That's not defending, that's scumhunting.

Before anyone says "Your doing it again" I know... I think your role was not scumhunting there. It was a conversation between JDodge/Lulu that could of possibly gone somewhere but didn't partially due to yourself, partially due to Lulu's/JDodge's insistance not to say anything more. This is a statement reflected in scotmany's comment

Hey mizzy, why don't you not talk for a little bit and see where this leads to between jd and lulu. You don't need to insert yourself into every single conversation; its not helpful.

and

No, there would have been a time for you to voice your opinion on the matter mizzy. That was not the time.

Mizzy wrote:
Porochaz wrote:I feel at L-1, Im going to be lynched at some point (presumably by Lulu). You are going to throw my theory away as idiotic... however Im going to state it anyway... my current thoughts are that mafia didn't choose the 1 shot mason. That directly contradicts Mizzy/Ether's claim, which would make them incredibly stupid (unlikely) or that their scum. I thought about it a while and I can see it happening, the other 2 power roles do not want to claim currently (and rightly so...) therefore Ether/Mizzy have a free reign with this strategy making them safe. There is nothing in any posts past the claim that makes me think that goes against this.
Wow, talk about a last-ditch effort. I can see why you might think that, and I'd question the town's sanity of every one of them didn't wonder at least once...but I also think you're reaching.

Okay, say you're right and we don't have a mason. That leaves us with having a vig, a weak doc, or a strong doc. We got no vig kill last night...granted, a vig wouldn't have to kill, but I doubt they'd hold off. Plus, a vig could claim safely, because the doc would/could protect them. So I can't see why they wouldn't claim. The ONLY power role, in fact, that wouldn't claim due to safety reasons
is the doc
.

I disagree I can see the weak doc not claiming as well... This was one of my theories that I feel is the most likely out of them. My vote is on YvonneSeer, due to the fact that in my scum combinations she could be placed in a lot of them... where you could only be placed with Ether and vice versa... anyway tea time... after tea Bookie's post and more on my theories, as I see Bookie's asked about that

Mizzy · Post Post #740 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:44 am

Porochaz wrote:I disagree I can see the weak doc not claiming as well... This was one of my theories that I feel is the most likely out of them. My vote is on YvonneSeer, due to the fact that in my scum combinations she could be placed in a lot of them... where you could only be placed with Ether and vice versa... anyway tea time... after tea Bookie's post and more on my theories, as I see Bookie's asked about that

I meant EITHER doc, A doc, ANY doc, weak or not. If we have another power role that is NOT A DOC OF ANY TYPE, then it is safe for them to claim.

Setael · Post Post #741 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:10 am

I find it hard to believe that a townie who has proof Mizzy and Ether are lying wouldn't have come out and claimed. That would net us 2 scums. I have never played in a game that had 2 docs, but if they both claimed couldn't they just protect each other through to end game? (Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like this was discussed already in this thread even). So where is their motivation to not claim? The only other option is vig and I agree that the vig would not have chosen to no kill N1. So basically, I don't think Porochaz' theory holds water.

Bookitty · Post Post #742 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:16 am

Setael, if there are two docs, they have no way to know that there are two docs. That's the point of why they wouldn't claim. But I find that scenario farfetched in the first place. I presented it as a possibility, but it's highly HIGHLY unlikely.

I think we can be pretty safe in thinking Ether and Mizzy are town.

Mizzy · Post Post #743 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:41 am

Bookitty wrote:Setael, if there are two docs, they have no way to know that there are two docs.

Exactly, which is why any type of doc is the ONLY type of power role that should not claim now.

Godfather, where aaaaaare you? <_<

Lulubelle · Post Post #744 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:05 am

Bookitty wrote:Lulubelle, leaving Porochaz aside for the moment, who are your main suspicions? If you had to vote for someone else, who would it be, right now?

I have some other thoughts, yes, but none yet strong enough to persue a lynch. Porochaz is firmly at the top of my list and I believe lynching him will reveal the way forward. Hold a gun to my head and make me vote for someone else and it would probably be Gorrad or Saetal, although I wouldn't be happy doing so in either case right now.

Porochaz · Post Post #745 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:05 am

Its farfetched yes, I will admit, its a lot easier to go that persons scummy and that person and that person... but Im being honest, I think its a distinct possibility that scum may of chosen a weak doc and another doctor... OTH I have a couple of other theories which I don't like as much... Bookitty in this game scares the hell out of me, she can play as scum doing a great townie impression, I feel and whilst I think shes town I have a problem with it because I can see a link between her and Yvonne (not in the same way as Mizzy-Yvonne) possible... Gorrad has made a few scummy moves but nothing I feel is major atm, Jordan has been away quite a bit... something I dislike from a supposedly active player...

FoS Jordan

. Theres a few other things I have noticed but don't feel there worth mentioning until tomorrow, if I make it... damnit, I was already to go yesterday I spend a good amount of time in this thread today and I want to stay in this game...

Porochaz · Post Post #746 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:07 am

Lulu I know your case for Gorrad but can you tell me your case against Setael please? Thanks

Lulubelle · Post Post #747 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:25 am

Porochaz wrote:Lulu I know your case for Gorrad but can you tell me your case against Setael please? Thanks

At the moment it's not a case but an

inkling

, which is why I asked last page for more information and why I'm not happy voting that way yet. The answer I seem to have gotten is that we can't openly discuss that quite yet, which is something I can (obviously) accept. Whether or not Setael is scum is going to be an issue for day three.

Porochaz wrote:Im being honest, I think its a distinct possibility that scum may of chosen a weak doc and another doctor

It's a possibility, yes, but until the game is over all we have are possibilities. Unless you have some reason for favouring a no-mason possibility over a mason possibility then all you have is idle speculation.

Bookitty · Post Post #748 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:18 am

Okay, I'm not clear. Are we all going to come to a consensus on whom the weak doc (and ONLY a weak doc) should protect tonight? So that when night falls, we have an investigation on someone?

I still think that's a decent plan. Decide who we'll lynch, and who'll be protected, and then we get an investigation out of the deal. If the weak doc doesn't die, we can be pretty sure that the person investigated was innocent (I think. If there's a flaw in this, please point it out now.) and if they do, we know who they had a guilty on.

Nothing in my question should be in any way construed as a request for a claim.

What do you think?

Mizzy · Post Post #749 (ISO) » Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:22 am

Bookitty wrote:Okay, I'm not clear. Are we all going to come to a consensus on whom the weak doc (and ONLY a weak doc) should protect tonight? So that when night falls, we have an investigation on someone?

I still think that's a decent plan. Decide who we'll lynch, and who'll be protected, and then we get an investigation out of the deal. If the weak doc doesn't die, we can be pretty sure that the person investigated was innocent (I think. If there's a flaw in this, please point it out now.) and if they do, we know who they had a guilty on.

Nothing in my question should be in any way construed as a request for a claim.

What do you think?

We talked about that not working out well because the death note for a mafia kill and for a weak-doc-found-scum kill are the same and you can't tell the difference. It might cause confusion.

Plus, if we tell the doc who to protect, if that person IS mafia, then the mafia can just not nightkill and let the doc self-destruct. We would never know if the weak doc had been legitimately targeted or not.