Mini 530: Guitar Hero Mafia: It's Finally Over

[Thanatos]

I won't hold it against you, Haschel. This is an emergency.

[Haschel Cedricson]

Posting to acknowledge prod. I will reread and post later tonight.

I have a headache and just vomited. I will not actullay be rereading tonight.

[Thanatos]

I'll hold that against you, however. <.<;

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

On a reread, I'm not sure I've ever seen a game with so little content in 12 pages. I think my vote will stay on SM for now, because of d3sisted's play. Particularly I don't like his seeming inattention to detail and vote switching, like he's trying to find any bandwagon that will stick.

[SeraphicMirth]

Ack. dang..I totally understand this because I do realize he played so crazy for a townie. But really, I am not the lynch. :-/ I don't have more of a case to make than the one I already did. unfortunately, the people who I think actually need a closer look are being replaced. so...I guess I'm in a tough situation.

I'm just saying..if you guys want to lynch to have a lynch then it makes sense but if you want a lynch that is scum, then we need to hold out some more. Hopefully we get a slew of replacements soon.

[Haschel Cedricson]

OKay, so DG takes us out of the random voting stage in 39/41. At this point ChaosOmega appears to react disproportionally, but it's not particularly scummy. It's impossible to tell how serious DG is about her suspicions of CO.

This leads to my 69, where I mistakenly thought that d3sisted had put CO at L-3. Thanatos compounds the mistake by describing the situation as L-2. d3sisted states that L-2 is okay in post 73. Now, in 73, d3s says that CO hadn't said jack since the pressure rose, yet CO had posted in 60, only five days and 7 posts prior to d3s' vote in 67.

Post 79 has me convinced that Thanatos is town.

In 89, DG proposes that CO and d3s are scumbuddies. There is no evidence for this. I do not understand why she would make such a claim, because at this point in the thread there has been no indication of that.

Post 94: "I am jester". Thanks for making things more confusing, d3s. Fuck you.

DG plays off the linking of d3s and CO as a "lighthearted statement". Now, DG spends much on 99 talking about how she has noticed several scummy things coming from d3sisted. At this point I checked the voting record, and with the exception of the first random vote, DG has not voted for d3sisted. Why would you not vote for somebody so scummy you think they might be jester?

In fact, going back to the jester thing, why bring that argument up in the first place? In my experience, proposing somebody to be the jester just makes it less likely that person gets lynched.

On page five, I present a case against hasdgfas. It doesn't get much attention, which is okay because it wasn't that great a case in the first place.

ChaosOmega nicely sums up why d3s is sketchy in post 128.

In 137, DG says

I will try to do a reread by this weekend sometime and

try to pick up on something new...

I suggest others do the same...

And let's move on... Keep things in mind, but stop repeating ourselves... We're gettin' nowhere...

Italics added for emphasis. Why does DG want us to move on from d3sisted?

d3sisted apparently isn't reading the thread, because he tries to act like he just discovered what we've been talking about for pages in 140 and 142.

In 192, DG states the d3sisted's posts "don't tend to look pro-town at all." Yet again, she refrains from voting. In fact, she votes for Natude instead. I pointed out the contradiction in the next post. At first that was a joke, but now I'm not so sure. It's not until 202 that I first get the idea that DG and d3s are scumbuddies.

In 246 SM replaces d3s. She builds up a case against DG. It's a good case; the sort of case that could avoid getting SM lynched today. However, I don't like the following two posts by SeraphicMirth:

Well, does anyone have any other suspicions or questioning? So that we don't have to sit around on DG.

I am wondering on the people who are content to sit on DG...there's more than one scum, so let's try moving onto others?

I can't help but interpret these as a desire to get the focus off of the person she just voted for. This doesn't make sense, except in the context of somebody attempting to un-bus a scumbuddy.

Conclusion: I am now more convinced that DG and SM are scumbuddies. I do not particularly care which one we lynch today.

[SeraphicMirth]

Wow... no.

First off, I agree with all your points on DG, since I, too, point the finger at her. I still think she is the most suspicious.

But where you go SO wrong is with the 2 quotes at the end, what a stretch! and you get an

FOS Haschel

for that.

Yes, my goal is to move us onto something else. The motive is where you stretch things.

Here's the quite logical train of thought on those 2 posts:
I post my opinion/defense.
Several people posted after me, unvoting me. Then, the game slowed. The first unvote was on the 23rd, followed by a couple more that same day. Another on the 24th..then 2 days pass before another unvote comes on the 26th. Pretty much every unvote says they need to re-read or are waiting on more discussion from others. Then the next is HC prodding for DG to speak on the 27th.

Esentially, we had all been waiting on a defense from DG since the 23rd and by the 28th, 5 days, no one had posted anything with any content because we're waiting on DG (from what it seemed to me). So, in an attempt to get us moving a little more,I take advantage of the fact that we have more than one scum. So if I pinned DG with my points and she is scum, she provided no defense and few people will vote to lynch without a defense (as it should be), we needed to move onto others or just sit here for days and days until she answers OR until someone comes up with their own insights upon re-read. Hence, "what is everyone getting on their re-reads?"

So, I was trying to prod for more activity. I had already posted my suspicions on a few people so I felt I couldn't contribute much more in that way of generating stuff. I thought if people had posted their insights, we could all participate with discussion.

Then, the mod states that DG asked for a replacement. As soon as I saw that, I could see that this line would DEFINITELY not get us anywhere at the moment. Hence why I posted again saying we need to move on. I stand by this -we need to continue scumhunting elsewhere or we can just sit here and post "I want DG to say something" until her replacement comes. If that's the game you want, then ok. I just, again, wonder on the people content to sit on non-playing possible scum. You want to keep the focus there, unproductive, so that we don't find the others? I don't get that.

[SeraphicMirth]

I also FOS you because your post just puts us back in the same place! Yes, we know that DG looks pretty scummy. I'm glad you back me up in that. It doesn't do anything for us right now unless we all want to lynch someone who is literally gone from the game. So, you put it back to me stating that you don't care which of us gets lynched. Well, that's going to come down on me logically since I am the only one who can say anything in my defense. Great set up

[SeraphicMirth]

unvote

vote Haschel Cedricson

My last post convinces myself. I'll get the "omg you OMGUSed" for this but whatever.

[Natude]

I like Haschel's post 280, and I like SM's defense. What I

don't

like is SM putting so much emphasis on what a stretch the motives were.

It's a perfectly logical idea, and it seems like it could easily be true. SM's defense was a good one, but it doesn't seem entirely truthful. I do, however, think that SM's defense nullifys Haschel's last two quotes.

SM's emphasis on the motives being a stretch is what really doesn't sit well with me, but after all the cases on DG, I think she's the best vote.

Vote: DeliciousGoldfish

[Thanatos]

This might sound really scummy, but Natude said pretty much what I was thinking. HC's points made sense, and do seem to make DG and SM look like they are distancing from each other. However, SMs defense, with the exception of the OMGUS vote (which could also be seen as an excuse to get her vote off of DG), is pretty reasonable. Therefore, I think that we should test this theory by lynching DG, who is already a plausible scum, and re-evaluating SM after that.

Since most of HC's logic about SM is based on the assumption that DG is scum (not counting D3 being a dick) it seems silly to lynch her today. So, I will confirm my vote on DG with intent to lynch, and hope the bandwagon grows.

[SeraphicMirth]

O.o
I'm surprised. People will vote someone who isn't here? Guess I was wrong about my assumption there.

Anyway, I do still think DG is the most suspicious, though I worry about lynching without a defense. Maybe there's some logic we didn't see but I guess since they're getting replaced the replacement could only do so much to answer for that.

So I'll

unvote

vote Delicious

. Though I still hold out my FOS on HC.

[Haschel Cedricson]

Dark Ermac needs to be replaced.

[Atticus]

"Deadlined!"
Vote Count

SeraphicMirth

(2):

hasdgfas, TheSweatpantsNinja

Natude

(3):

ChaosOmega, Dark Ermac, Delicious Goldfish

Delicious Goldfish

(2):

Natude, SeraphicMirth

Not Voting (5): perfect628, SilverPhoenix, Haschel Cedricson, Thanatos, Gorrad

Dark Ermac needs to be replaced.

Yes, he does.

[hasdgfas]

Mod: can you either keep the deadline in the thread title or in each vote count? It makes it easier to keep track of it

Also, the numbers in the VC are off.

[Haschel Cedricson]

Heh. I forgot to actually vote.

Vote: DeliciousGoldfish

[SeraphicMirth]

Ok, so the voting on DG is cool and all since it seems likely she was/is scum. However, we still have more scum out there. Even if you think it's just me and her, there are more than 2 I'm assuming. So...who else looks suspicious to people? Besides the 2 of us.

My list is still Perfect (who has asked to be replaced, so that's not all that helpful right now) and hasdgfas (this is from memory so maybe I spelled that wrong), for reasons stated. though my hasdgfas is just more of an IGMEOY deal..nothing too solid.

[SeraphicMirth]

And before I get questioned, I am pushing this whole "look at other people" thing because I strongly believe we need to get as much content out of today so that we can have a better time with analysis tomorrow. Those who aren't willing to say much are slightly suspect because it just lessens the content we have to go on, which is what Mafia would like...leaves much more room for a townie lynch error.

I mean, I do understand there's not much there right now, I am having a hard time too. So, I dunno..but..I guess anything would be nice. *shrug*

[Haschel Cedricson]

As far as I'm concerned, the day is over. I don't want anybody trying to direct powerroles or anything stupid like that.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I suppose based on SM's play that DG is more scummy than she is. I'm not completely sold that she's scum, but, well, I'm not sold that she's not scum, y'know? Plus saves us the trouble of getting a replacement.

Unvote, vote deliciousgoldfish.

[Gorrad]

I agree with TSN. Better lynch than most.

Vote: Deliciousgoldfish

[Thanatos]

um, Mod, I voted DG on the last page. That means she has 7 votes. That's a lynch

[hasdgfas]

Took long enough to get a lynch in this game.

[Natude]

um, Mod, I voted DG on the last page. That means she has 7 votes. That's a lynch

Err... Thanatos, I think you miss calculated. DG now has 6 votes. Me, SM, Haschel, Sweatpants, Gorrad, and you.

[Haschel Cedricson]

DG needs a prod since there is much discussion about him/her

And yet none of that discussion has come from you. You're here, you haven't voted yet. What do you think?