Mini 533: Something wicked this way comes! Game over!

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The above post fills me with happiness, sunshine, and kittens.

Mod Added

VOTE COUNT THE NINTH OF DAY TWO!

ZeekLTK

- 1 (Quickben)

Lowell

- 2 (TheSweatPantsNinja, OhGodMyLife)

OhGodMyLife

- 1 (geraintim)

QuickBen

- 2 (Petunho, soupfly)

Skruffs

- 3 (MichelSableHeart, ZeekLTK, Lowell)

MichelSableHeart

- 1 (Skruffs)

Not Voting

- 0

Soupfly and OhGodMyLife have been prodded

.
6 will lynch.

[MichelSableheart]

that def sounds liek you saying teh mafia didn't kill last night to me?

I already explained there is a difference between "did not send in a kill" and "did not kill". If a roleblocker blocks the mafioso who performs the kill, or if a doctor protects the target, the mafia did not kill, even though they did send one in.

find it odd that everyone is sitting here asking questions like "who led the bandwagon?" and when i did it on "did i think it was a lucky shot getting the cop "it keeps on getting brought by..michael...

You do realize there is a difference between the two? The answers to the first question are relatively easily verified by looking at day 1. They deal with public information, and will therefore tell mafia hardly anything new, whereas they may make town aware of something. The answer to your question is much more difficult to verify. Because the mafia knows the answer, whereas the town has to guess, it is much easier for the mafia to manipulate the answers, sending people in the wrong direction. Besides that, any answer town can come up with is inherently WIFOMy. "But what if that's what they want us to think...". And it gives more information to the mafia then it gives to the town. All town can do is speculate a bit, they can never reach a definite answer. To the mafia, however, it tells who is paying attention, who can be manipulated, who has suspicions that aren't really a threat to them.

Good questions QuickBen. They should make both their explanations for their behaviour at the end of day 1 perfectly clear.

[ZeekLTK]

First I just want to say I am only responding because there might be other people who still have doubts.

I still think QuickBen is likely to be scum, and this is just another example of him not doing anything except asking questions and letting other people do the work.

@

Everyone else

: Just go to the bottom and select "QuickBen" so that it only shows his posts. Then read through them.

What has he contributed to the game?

All he did on Day 1 was make 2 votes and leave.

On Day 2 he came out and put a bandwagon vote on me, tried to push the bandwagon a little bit, then went away again (but left his vote).

Then he came back and has only been saying that either I or soupfly "have to be" scum.

Why hasn't he said ANYTHING about what he thought about DS's play instead of just asking everyone what they think? Why hasn't he questioned the actions of Skruffs, or Lowell, or TSPN??

Just consider all of these things before you start saying "oh wow, great questions QuickBen". This is nothing more than a half hearted attempt to APPEAR to be contributing but actually still not do anything.

[sarcasm] Oh and thanks so much for giving me a chance to take your vote off, that means so much. [/sarcasm] You are the only player who is voting me, and most likely you are scum, so I don't really care that you have it on me. In fact, if you leave it on me it's only going to help expose you later because when I do die and it is revealed that I was telling the truth the whole time about my claim, the town is going to look at the voting records and you will be a prime suspect for keeping your vote on me for practically the entire Day 2.

But anyways...

@Zeek- Just a few questions, please bear with me.

1- Did you honestly think that DS was a self-lynching Jester?

2a- If so, why announce that you were going to hammer him if he got to L-1? Why not just do it if you were convinced?

2b- If not, why hammer him? If you didn't think he was a self lynching Jester, why not attack soupfly for *putting* him at L-1 right then?

Something is rotten between the two of you. Zeek, this is your chance to get my vote off you. Soupfly, this is your chance to keep my vote off you.

1 - YES! I already stated this numerous times. Do I need to quote myself from Day 1? If so I will...

If we have a vig you should kill DS on the first night. That way if he's the jester he loses and if he's mafia he's still dead.

Why would I suggest this if I didn't think there was a chance he was the jester?

Having thought about it, I don't think a jester is very likely in a mini normal. Then again, Disciple Slayer sure feels like he's wanting to get himself at L-1 as fast as possible.

Well based on my role I am pretty sure there are no vanilla townies in this game, so either way (if he's jester or not), he is lying to us.

The question we all need to figure out is: Why would someone fake roleclaim so early in the game when they are not in danger of being lynched?

Here I begin to explain why - because I believe he is lying about his role claim. At this point I think he could be jester or scum but am leaning towards jester.

I really don't like how all Lowell (and soupfly) just come in, vote, and don't explain it.

I especially don't like Lowell's. Here are his only two posts:

vote zeek

I agree with this sentiment exactly.

unvote, vote DS, FOS yvonne

Yvonne said she is suspicious of DS... so claim you are suspicious of Yvonne, but you go ahead and side with her by voting for the person that she is suspicious of?

unvote; vote Lowell

I am starting to lean heavily in the direction of jester, so obviously I don't want to vote for DS anymore. I remove my vote and put it on Lowell who has only been bandwagoning all day.

I don't really care about looking like scum. I'm town. A vanilla townie, to be more specific. Also, I am not the jester.

I am going to be gone from now 'til Wednesday next week, so put me at L-1 but don't lynch me until I get a chance to say my piece, where you will find that my anti-town behavior is actually pro-town by far.

I'm re-reading through the thread and came across this.

I was going to say: if he is a jester with the condition that he has to lynch himself, maybe we should just lynch him before he gets back so we can still kill him and, if he is a jester, he still loses (or if he's mafia then, again, we still kill him).

But it's already Sunday, so I guess we blew our chance.

However, I am almost certain he is a jester with a condition that he has to lynch himself. So for those of you that don't think he is a jester, can we all at least get on the same page and agree that

if we wanted him lynched

, we'll make sure that someone does lynch him and he doesn't get a chance to lynch himself? I don't know how we'd do that, but there's 11 of us against him, it shouldn't be that hard.

DS had previously said "put me on L-1 but don't lynch me" (I quoted this exact post on a post I made on the previous page).

This is where I go from thinking "maybe he is a jester" to "he must be a jester who has to lynch himself"... thinking "why would he possibly call on us to put him on L-1 but then keep saying 'oh, but don't lynch me, leave me there!'??" My answer was: He wants us to put him on L-1 so he can cast the final vote.

In this post (quoted) I state that I am confident that he is a jester and explain that I think he has to lynch himself. I then ask the rest of the town (including the scum) if we can agree to make sure he is not in a position to lynch himself.

This lends itself to "2a"... I said that I did not want DS in a position to lynch himself. People still kept voting for him though, so I stated that I would hammer because I had already told the town I did not want DS to be able to post (and vote for himself) while he was on L-1 - so I made sure everyone knew if they put him on L-1, I would vote for him before he had a chance to vote himself.

Again, I figured that if everyone thought I would hammer, no one would put him on L-1. If people didn't think (or know) I would hammer, they might put him on L-1 and then say "okay fine, you're on L-1, explain yourself." And in that position I fully expected DS to come in and post saying "hahaha, vote: Disciple Slayer... I win!" so I was not about to let that happen.

[Skruffs]

But it's not suspicious to you that someone who was encouraging the thought process, who even introduced it, Michael, would turn around RIGHT AFTER he gets to -1 and say he DIDN'T think it was likely that DS was a jester? And then not to vote, considering it doesn't make any sense for mafia to TRY and get votes day one, and is in fact almost ENTIRELY something a new townie player would do?

I know you can't say it was suspicious to you, or even that he said that and DIDN'T remove his vote, because if it WAS suspicious to you, you would PROBABLY have not hammered as soon as possible when he was put at -1. You didn't consider Michel's actiosn at all: You were focused entirely on DS. And the next day you retroactively tried to pin it on Soupfly, when you shoudl have in fact tried to goad soupfly about it the day before.

I am dissecting you and Michel's Actions, Zeek, and I am seeing scum all the way to the core. Both of you are scum, I'm willing to bet on it. Both of you need to be lynched, and if it means afterwards that I should be lynched for "knowing" it, then that's fine by me, because that means I still traded out two scum lynches for a town lynch, and you can quote me on that.

From my experiences, in playing online forum mafia, Zeek and Michel are playing as scum.



I realize that DS played horribly, and to be honest, he DID invite destruction upon himself. However, the methods that were used by some players to achieve that end are Very suspicious, and NOT methods I would assume town players to use.
I realize that my predecessor was ALSO a horrible player, and encouraged the lynch. It is true, Sensfan was all about the DS-death. I personally think he was a loud, well intentioned, but MISGUIDED yapdog. I love how Zeek is trying to pin the responsibility of the lynch on first soupfly, then me, and now Quickben, when he's the one who intentionally, immediately hammered someone who was asking for a chance to explain themselves at -1. He's refusing to look at Michel.
Scum scumminy scum scum. His desperation to push attention elsewhere is going to catch up to him eventually.

[soupfly]

@Soupfly- couple questions for you as well...

1- Did you believe that DS was a self-lynching jester when you voted him?

2a- If so, why put him at L-1 knowing that someone had just claimed they would end the day if you did so?

2b- If not, why vote him, instead of attacking zeek for proposing and pushing the self-lynching jester theory?

Something is rotten between the two of you. Zeek, this is your chance to get my vote off you. Soupfly, this is your chance to keep my vote off you.

already answered this a bunch of times but here's the summary:
-the whole end of d1 was poorly played by me. i saw the conditioned lynch by Zeek and found it scummy so i thought i'd confront him by putting him in a situation where he could do a scummy thing. he did that thing but afterwards i'm not so sure that he was scum or just dumb noob. i agree that it wasn't a great play by me (i'd already mentioned that i was a little under the influence when i did it) and i won't try to defend it.

-as far as zeek the whole self-lynching thing was really stupid. then the idea that he prejustifies the lynch by conditioning it on somebody putting DS at l-1 was just too scummy for me. i just didn't challenge him in the right way.

-i'm not sure that zeek is scum because i'm leaning towards him being a newb scum based on his ridiculously poor play to date.

-i don't like the case against skruff. i think that is a townie.

-i don't like that msh is seemingly buddying up to zeek. zeek is an obvious lynch target so if i think zeek is town then msh is likely scum.

unvote: quickben

vote: michaelsableheart

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

The case on MSH is looking better and better all the time. I'd still prefer a zeek/lowell lynch, though. I do find it interesting that all three of those players are voting for skruffs, however.

[OhGodMyLife]

Y'all wrote an awful lot this weekend. I've got some serious catching up to do, but while I'm doing that I'm happy with my vote for lowell, he still seems extremely scummy, and belated responses to all the comments directed at him didn't change my opinion.

[ZeekLTK]

The reason I am not suspicious of, nor looking into, MichelSabelheart is:

a) He is the only player who understood the miller claim and helped explain it. If it weren't for him the scum would have been able to mislynch me earlier in the day... then we would be on Day 3 in a Lynch or Lose (assuming NK goes through). This would be very beneficial to the scum.

Therefore, I find it highly unlikely that he would have stopped the bandwagon against me if he were scum as I was an easy target for scum to mislynch following the DS hammer.

Basically, if he is scum, he's an idiot - at the time all he would have had to do was place his vote on me (and he easily could have justified it) and then I would have been on L-1, and would pretty much have been mislynched by now. I don't think he's an idiot, so I don't think he's scum.

b) All of the people attacking him are the people I am suspicious of being scum. If (people who I think are) scum are attacking someone, most likely they are attacking a townie instead of one of their own scum buddies.

[soupfly]

b) All of the people attacking him are the people I am suspicious of being scum.

you think that anybody that has anything negative to say about you is scum. and vice versa. time to rethink your game play.

[OhGodMyLife]

The walls of text produced by some of you these past few days saying the same things over and over again are making my head hurt.

Of course that could also be the hangover from five straight days of drinking.

[geraintm]

The reason I am not suspicious of, nor looking into, MichelSabelheart is:

a) He is the only player who understood the miller claim and helped explain it.
Therefore, I find it highly unlikely that he would have stopped the bandwagon against me if he were scum as I was an easy target for scum to mislynch following the DS hammer.

Basically, if he is scum, he's an idiot

b) All of the people attacking him are the people I am suspicious of being scum. If (people who I think are) scum are attacking someone, most likely they are attacking a townie instead of one of their own scum buddies.

zeek, a few people have mentioned their worries that Michael has been buddying up to you the last few days.
you say a scum wouldn't stop a bandwagon on you as a townie, but i am afraid it isn't that unusual for a mafia member to make themselves a friend and use the "i was defending this nice town person from being lynched, i couldn't possibly be scum" defence.

are you suspicious of me being scum??

[Qman]

Lowell and Petunho have been prodded.

[geraintm]

oh, and i realise now that my last post looks like i am guiding zeek (something i have told others off for), but zeek seems like he had never considered the situation so it had to be brought up

[MichelSableheart]

But it's not suspicious to you that someone who was encouraging the thought process, who even introduced it, Michael, would turn around RIGHT AFTER he gets to -1 and say he DIDN'T think it was likely that DS was a jester? And then not to vote, considering it doesn't make any sense for mafia to TRY and get votes day one, and is in fact almost ENTIRELY something a new townie player would do?

Skruffs, STOP IGNORING ME WHEN I POINT OUT THE FACTS! As I quoted in my previous post, I already decided that it was unlikely that DS was a jester in post #84, not immediately after Zeek put DS at L-1.

-i don't like that msh is seemingly buddying up to zeek. zeek is an obvious lynch target so if i think zeek is town then msh is likely scum.

What was I supposed to do, soupfly? Zeek was a likely lynch target whom I suspected to be town. If I ignore the case, it's likely to go to a lynch. Joining the case would be even worse. As far as I can see, I had no option but to defend him. I admit, I could be scum buddying up, but I don't understand why you believe that is more likely then town defending whom they perceive to be town.

[MichelSableheart]

EBWOP: sorry, the quote op post #84 is in post #371, 2 posts ago on my last post.

[geraintm]

As I quoted in my previous post, I already decided that it was unlikely that DS was a jester in post #84, not immediately after Zeek put DS at L-1.

Having thought about it, I don't think a jester is very likely in a mini normal. Then again, Disciple Slayer sure feels like he's wanting to get himself at L-1 as fast as possible.

you can see why people might be confused. you have the whole "having thought about it" part
but the next sentence you go "then again..."

how much room to wriggle did you want to give yourself?

[Petunho]

I would say that Skruffs' attack against Michel looks to be based on faulty reasoning and ignorance of Michel's explanations.Yes, there are some good points made by Skruffs, but there has been also twisting and misinterpreation of both Zeek's and Michel's posts, that I'm not in any way convinced that those players are scums.

There was talk about who was leading thewagon against DS yesterday and I would also say SensFan, who was both agressive and loud against DS. Zeek made in my mind good recap in post #369 where it clearly stands that SensFan was the player who pushed the wagon when it seemed to stop. To his defence I have to say DS almost demanded that wagon was pushed forward. So, like Michel said SensFan pushed the wagon and Zeek and Soupfly finished DS off.

Zeek has made also some disturbing post in particular the post where he said something like "If cop did that it cannot be scummy". And like many have corrected him, this is not the case in anyway. Everybody can act scummily and just based on their role their actions doesn't make all of their sayings scummy-free.

On the other hand Zeek has made good points and I still cannot believe someone is still questioning him about the cases we have cleared many times. It is good to question people, but asking the same questions again and again is not contributing the game anything new. So, Zeek did you believe DS was selflynching jester? And yeah, you don't have to answer this question...again.

I am dissecting you and Michel's Actions, Zeek, and I am seeing scum all the way to the core. Both of you are scum, I'm willing to bet on it. Both of you need to be lynched, and if it means afterwards that I should be lynched for "knowing" it, then that's fine by me, because that means I still traded out two scum lynches for a town lynch, and you can quote me on that.

I'm not loving this post at all. You just cannot be so certain off their scumminess and especially when your accusations doesn't look so convincing to me. This post disturbs me a lot.

-i don't like the case against skruff. i think that is a townie.

Why?

The case on MSH is looking better and better all the time.

I would like to know why, 'cause in my eye the case looks worse and worse all the time.

[Lowell]

Received prod. Sorry, have been sick. Will try to get back in this.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I would like to know why, 'cause in my eye the case looks worse and worse all the time.

He had more to do with the DS lynch than I initially gave him credit for. And I also didn't notice the amount of buddying up he's been doing with zeek. I don't think, like skruffs, that that definitely makes them both scum. But, from my perspective, defending zeek is a stretch. . . unless you happen to be scum and know he's town. I still think its more like zeek is scum, but he's moving up my list.

[ZeekLTK]

zeek, a few people have mentioned their worries that Michael has been buddying up to you the last few days.
you say a scum wouldn't stop a bandwagon on you as a townie, but i am afraid it isn't that unusual for a mafia member to make themselves a friend and use the "i was defending this nice town person from being lynched, i couldn't possibly be scum" defence.

Well I see it this way:

At the beginning of Day 2 I had 4 votes against me with 6 needed to lynch. At this point Michel helped explain the miller claim (which I assume is because he believed it... I feel like I explained myself well enough to show that I really am a miller) and basically derailed the bandwagon.

I have a hard time trying to see why he would do this as a scum. If he was scum, he would know I was town, yes. But also, there was plenty of reasons to vote for me at the time. I think it would have benefited him, and the scum as a whole, more if he had voted to put me at L-1 as then eventually someone would have come in and mislynched me (maybe a townie or maybe another scum).

Then the game would go to night, most likely the mafia would kill, and then we would be on Day 3 in lynch or lose (assuming 3 mafia [which is how many there were in my last mini] because there would be 8 people left with a pending night kill which, if both kills were townies would make it 3 vs 3 on Day 4 which equals a town loss).

So basically, if I had been lynched, all the scum would have to do is try to get one more townie lynched on Day 3 to win. It wouldn't be that tough too do.

Instead, what he did was help keep me alive and avoid the mislynch. If he is scum this was a

bad play

, because it delayed the game and allowed us to examine other players. In doing so, we may possibly end up lynching a scum today. So this while this *might* benefit him (as scum) individually, it's a TERRIBLE play overall for the scum group, as I would imagine they would much rather win the game with 3 straight town lynches without losing a member as opposed to go 5-6 days and come down to the very last vote or so.

Since defending me was such a bad play for a scum to do, I tend to think the player who played this way is not scum.

I also think that the scum WOULD try to do what I described: get me lynched as soon as possible to move on to Day 3's lynch or lose. Hence why I'm HIGHLY suspicious of the 4 people who did vote for me earlier in the day - because there is a chance they are a townie who thought I was suspicious, but most likely they were scum who KNEW I was a townie and KNEW I was an easy target to get mislynched.

[ZeekLTK]

b) All of the people attacking him are the people I am suspicious of being scum.

you think that anybody that has anything negative to say about you is scum. and vice versa. time to rethink your game play.

I find anyone who attacks a townie suspicious; since I know I am a townie, I tend to find people who attack me more suspicious than those who attack others (whose roles I don't know).

See Skruffs - I am suspicious of him because between him and SensFan they attacked ALL 3 players that I know are townies (me, DS, and Yvonne).

[OhGodMyLife]

Zeek, all of that last post has a big caveat, which is that if you're SCUM its just a bunch of hot air.

The argument of "MS would have voted for me if he was scum because I'm town" is full of holes. If both of you are scum, he wouldn't have voted for you, and would have defended you. If you are scum and he is town, he may very well just have bought your miller claim and therefore defended you.

I personally believe that the miller claim is highly plausible especially in the context of how/when it was made but you're still quickly losing points with me.

[ZeekLTK]

Zeek, all of that last post has a big caveat, which is that if you're SCUM its just a bunch of hot air.

The argument of "MS would have voted for me if he was scum because I'm town" is full of holes.

If both of you are scum, he wouldn't have voted for you, and would have defended you. If you are scum and he is town, he may very well just have bought your miller claim and therefore defended you.

I personally believe that the miller claim is highly plausible especially in the context of how/when it was made but you're still quickly losing points with me.

I was asked what I felt about the situation and I explained it from my point of view.

All of your "holes" come from thinking I might be scum. Tell me: are there any holes in the argument if you look at it as though I am a townie? If so, what else do I need to address? If not, how am I "losing points"??

[ZeekLTK]

Zeek has made also some disturbing post in particular the post where he said something like "If cop did that it cannot be scummy". And like many have corrected him, this is not the case in anyway. Everybody can act scummily and just based on their role their actions doesn't make all of their sayings scummy-free.

I didn't say they "weren't scummy"... I said that since the cop played that way, it's not necessarily a good way to find scum for attacking people who played similar to the cop.

The main point was Skruffs said Yvonne was scummy because Yvonne thought there might be a jester. If the cop thought there was a jester, then that means that other townies might have also thought there was a jester and therefore it's not a good way to find scum just going after people who thought there was a jester.

[Skruffs]

"The main point was Skruffs said Yvonne was scummy because Yvonne thought there might be a jester. If the cop thought there was a jester, then that means that other townies might have also thought there was a jester and therefore it's not a good way to find scum just going after people who thought there was a jester."

Michel thought there probably WASN'T a jester, but left him at -1 so you could hammer under the pretense that there WAS one.
Why is this not suspicious?