Mini #564 - Mafia in Crubtown - Game Over

[Cephrir]

FoSoSoSoS!

Finger of Suspicion of Suspicion of Suspicion of Suspicion or Finger of SOS, oh, SOS? Huh? What kind of subliminal messages are you trying to send here, scum?

On a more serious note- VoD, is 121 a response to me? If not, why did you post it? Explaining why you said something when nobody asked you = kinda weird. It's also a lot of the same of what you said in 114.

[darkdude]

You didn't have enough evidence, yet you were convinced he seemed like scum from reading that one particular post from windkirby. You thought he's scum but you didn't vote for him, instead choosing to keep your vote on the player who is attacking windkirby of being scum. That is suspicious to me.

First of all your accusation does not hold. I did not ever point a finger at anyone in particular. Rather, I first suspected a statement excusing a joke vote that to me seemed like a bandwagon attempt. Even if there were enough evidence to suggest a bandwagon, we would still need to figure out who to take out first (bandwagon is a GROUP action). We did not even get to that phase, instead we were caught in debating on the validity of my claim. Then the really defensive post came up, so I diverted by efforts elsewhere.

I don't recall saying "THIS GUY IS SCUM". I was giving reasons to why the joke votes seemed suspicious.

Now please state why we shouldn't lynch YOU for making baseless accusations trying to get ME lynched.

[Crub]

Fifth Vote Count of Day 1

Cephrir (3):

darkdude, thevampireofdusseldorf, mozsuggs

QuantumFruit (3):

Talitha, Akonas, Pink Puppy

windkirby (2):

zeddicus, QuantumFruit

Pink Puppy (1):

vikingfan

Akonas (1):

windkirby

darkdude (1):

YvonneSeer

mozsuggs (1):

Cephrir

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

I will get on top of prod's tomorrow

[Cephrir]

You didn't have enough evidence, yet you were convinced he seemed like scum from reading that one particular post from windkirby. You thought he's scum but you didn't vote for him, instead choosing to keep your vote on the player who is attacking windkirby of being scum. That is suspicious to me.

First of all your accusation does not hold. I did not ever point a finger at anyone in particular. Rather, I first suspected a statement excusing a joke vote that to me seemed like a bandwagon attempt.

That

is

pointing a finger.

Even if there were enough evidence to suggest a bandwagon, we would still need to figure out who to take out first (bandwagon is a GROUP action). We did not even get to that phase, instead we were caught in debating on the validity of my claim. Then the really defensive post came up, so I diverted by efforts elsewhere.

Your efforts? You haven't posted that much content, you make it sound like you've been putting in a lot of effort. Bandwaggoning may be a group action, but it has to start somewhere, and that's what voting does. Would you suggest that we instead sit around FoSing each other until a majority FoS the same person? o_O

I don't recall saying "THIS GUY IS SCUM". I was giving reasons to why the joke votes seemed suspicious.

Being suspicious indicates... you know... suspicion.

Now please state why we shouldn't lynch YOU for making baseless accusations trying to get ME lynched.

I lol'd. Seriously, Yvonne's (I think, you didn't cite your quote and I don't feel like looking) accusations are not baseless at all. They're clearly based on your posts...

It's frustrating when it seems like there are more than 3 scum in a game that has 3 scum in it.

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

Well I think you said it was rather long or something so I thought I could pick out the main points to make it easier for others to get the gist of what I was trying to say. A Mcfiction version of the novel if you like. I am aware some find qfs length a slight issue and have made notes or boiled down points to make things easier.

[QuantumFruit]

First of all, before my actual post, I want to apologize for not posting in a while - I've had a very busy week. Not lurking, or if I was, I didn't mean to be.

---

Wrong. You can read into a joke vote, or even more likely the way someone responds to it. That's how games basically always start. That gives us something to go off of. There's really no other basis. While I don't think extended periods of joke voting are productive, some is necessary.

I don't agree, but whatever. It's hard to read into something insubstantial. Not that that phase is unneccessary, it's very important. Just not for that reason. See: below.

What do you not agree with? Why? Why do you think that the phase is very important?

---

Also, QF, I think your problem is that you feel a need to overjustify everything. Think about what you're saying and whether you really need all those quotes.

I want to make sure everyone understands where I'm coming from and what I mean. I use quotes so people know the context. I'm used to being very thorough. If you want, I can tone it down.

Also, what does "IGMEOY" mean?

---

I just think you're wishy-washy. Flippy-floppy. You want it both ways with everything, finding a way to say you're scum hunting, but not really. You're "setting up scum hunting." Which is neither here nor there. It's like if somebody asked you "are you pregnant" and you said, "Yes, I'm a little bit pregnant." How can you be a little bit pregnant?? You either are or you're not!

Actually, I'm not wishy-washy, or flippy-floppy. I have particularly changed my mind on anything. I haven't been fluctuating. It's more like saying "I'm a little bit racist" - which, according to Avenue Q, is possible. Yes, I have a more moderate stance in this business. Fine, tracking is a part of hunting - but what I was saying was that I'm not shooting anyone down yet. There simply isn't enough evidence.

---

Also, I don't see why so many people were jumping on me for long posts with quotes, Cephrir has been doing it, and VoD has been doing it. Not all the time, but in some posts.

I somewhat also take offense at you saying they were thin on content. I have a specific issue I try to express, and then I elaborate so that everyone understands the details and the shades of what I'm saying. That's why semantics come up.

Joke votes are over, and I didn't find windkirby's defensiveness as something to consider later.

Unvote

[zeddicus]

Just going off general impressions.

care to explain why your general impressions mark me as scum?

Shall we just kill someone?

eager for night?

unvote, vote:mozsuggs

darkdude, none of those reasons are baseless, they all have very good points. You pushed a wagon without adding your vote to it.

Major FoS: darkdude

I need two votes. =/

Also, what does "IGMEOY" mean?

I've Got My Eye On You

[QuantumFruit]

Thanks, zeddicus.

Also, mozsuggs, do something productive please.

I'd vote for him, but I'm hesitant. There was a guy in another game I'm in, and he did this same thing. "Man up and vote!" etc. Well, he got lynched Day 1 and he was town. So, I don't know how telling this is.

darkdude, do you not see the legitimacy of claims against you? If you think they are wrong, please explain why they are wrong (granted, they'll probably jump on you for being long-winded and without substance ).

I have a personal vendetta against some of you, and I will try to not let it interfere with the game. I am genuinely hurt by the phrasing "thin on content." I was trying to get people to see the different angles of the issues, and you took it as wishy-washy and lacking substance. Sorry I'm not so polarized. Though, I might just feel upset by it now because I'm tired (:P to you, Akonas).

[Pink Puppy]

Shall we just kill someone?

Now is the time to post more content, unless you're scum.


@quantum -- I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Sorry if I did.

About the nuances....I generally feel that "trying to have it both ways" is scummy, because it signals a person who is molding their suspicions to fit whatever person they want to target. Like they are picking the target first, and worrying about reasons later. Which is what a townie would never do.

[YvonneSeer]

You didn't have enough evidence, yet you were convinced he seemed like scum from reading that one particular post from windkirby. You thought he's scum but you didn't vote for him, instead choosing to keep your vote on the player who is attacking windkirby of being scum. That is suspicious to me.

First of all your accusation does not hold. I did not ever point a finger at anyone in particular. Rather, I first suspected a statement excusing a joke vote that to me seemed like a bandwagon attempt. Even if there were enough evidence to suggest a bandwagon, we would still need to figure out who to take out first (bandwagon is a GROUP action). We did not even get to that phase, instead we were caught in debating on the validity of my claim. Then the really defensive post came up, so I diverted by efforts elsewhere.

I don't recall saying "THIS GUY IS SCUM". I was giving reasons to why the joke votes seemed suspicious.

Now please state why we shouldn't lynch YOU for making baseless accusations trying to get ME lynched.

Cephrir already got most of these spot on in his post 128. This is exactly the thing which I said would come up because of the type of post you made. You leave your opinions on windkirby ambiguous so that you can safely escape when someone points it out but if nobody notices it, you're quietly joining the wagon from the sidelines. Now, why would a townie do this? Why would a townie be afraid of being specifically linked to wagons?

Generally, when you find someone suspicious, you think he might be scum for the exact same reasons you find him suspicious. You're not thinking he might be a townie because he was suspicious.

Also, your attempt to try and turn this around on me is noted.

[YvonneSeer]

Now please state why we shouldn't lynch YOU for making baseless accusations trying to get ME lynched.

I lol'd. Seriously, Yvonne's (I think, you didn't cite your quote and I don't feel like looking) accusations are not baseless at all. They're clearly based on your posts...

It's frustrating when it seems like there are more than 3 scum in a game that has 3 scum in it.

Woah, hold on a minute here. How do you know there are specifically 3 scum, Cephrir?

[Cephrir]

What do you not agree with? Why? Why do you think that the phase is very important?

I don't think you can read much into a joke vote, but the phase is important because it gets us into the game (usually when someone tries to read something into a joke vote). It doesn't really matter though, we can agree to disagree.

Woah, hold on a minute here. How do you know there are specifically 3 scum, Cephrir?

Oops, mixed this game up with Open 62. It doesn't help that you're in both games.

[windkirby]

Woah, hold on a minute here. How do you know there are specifically 3 scum, Cephrir?

Oops, mixed this game up with Open 62. It doesn't help that you're in both games.

Yes, Yvonne. Shame on you for making Cephrir say something scummy! If you could elaborate, Ceph, could you please specify which game you were getting this one mixed up with? I'm not sure how one would find Open 62. If you could help me find it, it'd make me feel better.

[Cephrir]

viewtopic.php?t=7634

[Akonas]

does a mini normal have a jester?

There's about a 99% chance we don't.

darkdude: Why don't you want to vote?

mozsuggs: what do you think of all this?

Supporting a wagon from the sidelines but not committing yourself to it is a really scummy thing to do.

Why do you say this? I don't really see the connection.

[darkdude]

Yeah I am aware I'm turning your accusation around. Because for some reason you really want to get my lynched.

"My efforts" means my suspicions and deductions based on the events here. Obviously I have not found anything close to a smoking gun yet otherwise I would have been less ambiguous. I don't see why you can't accept the fact that suggesting a scummy action is valid even if it is not very specific; how the hell else are you going to start a game?

My points of defense are:

1. no specific target of suspicion from me until last post, contrary to what you claim
2. was merely asking around to see if others shared my opinion on joke votes

Well now you got me convinced that you are scum. So I'll

unvote

and

vote: YvonneSeer

.

One of 3 possible outcomes:

1. I am scum, which means you are right.
2. I am innocent and the ones accusing me are scum
3. we are all innocent, outplayed by mafia

Of course I know that it is one of the latter 2, but saying that is useless. I will be cleared of suspicion if I do indeed get lynched, so I'm just saying the remaining town should keep that in mind.

[darkdude]

Just saw above post (it was made during the time I wrote the last one)

darkdude: Why don't you want to vote?

I didn't vote because it would be pointless to suggest people are bandwagoning if I joined in myself. But now I did just vote

[Cephrir]

Not everyone who accuses you is scum, Captain OMGUS.

[Pink Puppy]

Supporting a wagon from the sidelines but not committing yourself to it is a really scummy thing to do.

I agree with this.

It's sort of inciting the mob to take action without taking the action yourself and thus, avoiding the heat.

[windkirby]

Supporting a wagon from the sidelines but not committing yourself to it is a really scummy thing to do.

I agree with this.

It's sort of inciting the mob to take action without taking the action yourself and thus, avoiding the heat.

I didn't agree with it at first, but when you put it like that it makes a whole lot of sense, not to mention darkdude seems to be getting a little nervous, getting reactive and talking a lot about getting lynched in his post when he's not even that close to it, is he?

FOS: darkdude

Nothing too serious, but these things do add up. IGMEOY/IGMIOU/whatever.

[zeddicus]

unvote, vote: darkdude

one vote on you and you talk about being lynched? I also get a defeatist attitude vibe from your last post (140).

also, you are basically just OMGUSsing Yvonne.

we need to lynch darkdude now.

[vikingfan]

careful zed...I'm always leery of people who say we need to do things NOW... there is never a need to hurry. Longer days always help the town. Of course, there is a point where a lynch is good, but IMO, we haven't reached that point yet.

that being said, I'm sensing heavy scummy vibes from darkdude since he's overly paranoid at the moment and not giving really good reasons to go after Yvonne.

unvote vote darkdude

.

[darkdude]

The point of voting for someone is to get them lynched correct? So when I vote, I

want

that person to gete lynched. If someone votes for me I see it the same way.

[Cephrir]

Not neccessarily. A vote implies that one of the following is true:

A) You want that person lynched
B) You want to see how that person reacts to your vote
C) It is the random vote phase
or D) You find that person to be the most suspicious out of everyone.

In the case of D, it's a matter of playstyle. Some people use votes to express suspicion; others prefer to use their votes conservatively and FoS instead; some do both to indicate varying levels of suspicion.

[QuantumFruit]

@Pink Puppy: It's not about having it both ways for me, I just want to have everything figured out. I wouldn't want to accidentally lynch a townie. I understand what you mean, but I don't think it'd help town to be too trigger-happy either.

@darkdude: It's not about trying to get you lynched. Don't spin it that way. Certain things you've done are suspicious - please explain them. Now, you just OMGUS-ed Yvonne and made yourself look more scummy. How has she made you think she's scum?

FOS: darkdude

@Yvonne and Pink Puppy: I don't see how it holds to say that pointing things out from the sideline is scummy. Darkdude might have just been pointing out a few things to get discussion going - the indicator of his scumminess (imo) would be his reaction.

@Everyone: Let's not get too over-eager band-wagoning and keep track of the vote count. (Btw, I don't throw my votes out like candy, so when I do vote, it's basically a final decision type of thing [joke votes excepted]. On the other hand, it takes a lot for me to decide to vote. Just keep that in mind. I like giving people a chance to defend themselves.)