Mini 572 - Packrats (game over)

[Ether]

3 Andycyca (Capricious, Skruffs, Elmo)
3 Capricious (Zindaras, Sir Tornado, eldarad)
2 Rotten Snitch (Mizzy, Andycyca)

3 Unvote (hasdgfas, Rotten Snitch, Y)

11 alive; 6 to lynch.

[Sir Tornado]

Er... Wait. Not happy with my vote.

vote RS

[Mizzy]

Unvote

:

Rotten Snitch

,

vote

:

Andycya

wagon wagon wagon

Wow, this feels a bit out of character for you.

[Y]

I'm a bit curious about how Y and Skruffs effectively derailed the RS wagon, and it is noted.

In one hand I see no real progression in the RS case. On the other hand, we have Capricious, who decided to remain really quiet all of a sudden. I believe he's hiding while some one else is in the spotlight, hoping to be forgotten.

[Elmo]

I think RS is pretty scummy at the moment. I especially don't like his responses.

the vagueness is overwhelming =O

[Mizzy]

I think RS is pretty scummy at the moment. I especially don't like his responses.

the vagueness is overwhelming =O

Sir T's post there had more content than your "Wagon wagon wagon!" vote post. Just sayin'.

[Zindaras]

POst tomorrow.

[hasdgfas]

POst tomorrow.

I hate it when people do this.

FoS: Zindaras

[Ether]

It occurs to me that Daylight Savings Time requires me to stay up kinda late to effectively implement the current deadline. I've just bumped it to two hours earlier, at 3:00 am GMT on Wednesday instead.

Any objections should be sent to me privately--do note the nature of the deadline, though.

[Skruffs]

I was about to complain about hte immediacy of a deadline on day one, but I see that it's not a real dedline, more like a "Sell By Date", so that's okay.

[Elmo]

Mizzy: Eh. It's self-evident that I didn't give a reason for voting Andy. Why is Sir Tornado voting Snitch? It kinda looks a lil' like he's given a reason, but he hasn't. And I don't like that. So I'd like him to spell it out for us.

• If the game goes to night due to a deadline, there won't be a lynch. Someone has to consciously place a hammer.

Would like to point this out. With this posting rate, we're liable to end d1 without a lynch when the deadline kicks in, which is pretty much the end of tomorrow. So, uh, wagons plz?

People I arbitrarily dun' like: andy, cow, Sir T, Snitchiepoos

[Skruffs]

I"d be fine with quicklynching Zindaras. He's soooo scum, it makes my pores itch just reading his name on on the screen, and it's going to be hard for me to get over that huge glaring black spot on my scumdar while he's still alive.

[Mizzy]

I"d be fine with quicklynching Zindaras. He's soooo scum, it makes my pores itch just reading his name on on the screen, and it's going to be hard for me to get over that huge glaring black spot on my scumdar while he's still alive.

Was this sarcasm?

[Skruffs]

Not really. Me and Zindaras have a history, a history in which he wwas factually scum every time but one. So I am trained to be suspicious of him now. I'm still posting out side of that suspicion, but as the number of players dwindle, the more likely i will be to push for his lynch.

[Mizzy]

Not really. Me and Zindaras have a history, a history in which he wwas factually scum every time but one. So I am trained to be suspicious of him now. I'm still posting out side of that suspicion, but as the number of players dwindle, the more likely i will be to push for his lynch.

Well, I am happy that you're being honest about it, but I do hope you'll show a good case if you expect the rest of us to believe you about his scumminess...I haven't really seen anything in this game as of yet to make me wonder about him.

I'm still happy with my vote, especially since RS has disappeared. Capri is also still on my list for scummy-enough-to-lynch, but I don't want to rush things and would

love

to see more from both of them.

[eldarad]

Interesting how the people under suspicion have disappeared a few days before the activity-based deadline comes into effect.

We need to consider whether we can reach a compromise lynch, and whether that would be better than a no-lynch.

I'm not really seeing the case on Andycyca at the moment, but I would be prepared to switch my vote to Rotten Snitch when deadline hits as a poor substitute for lynching Capriscum.
Capricious is definitely my number one lynch choice though.

[Y]

Not really. Me and Zindaras have a history, a history in which he wwas factually scum every time but one. So I am trained to be suspicious of him now. I'm still posting out side of that suspicion, but as the number of players dwindle, the more likely i will be to push for his lynch.

Him being scum in other games makes no difference to this game. This post is completely irrelevant.
Is there anything productive you'd like to add?

[Capricious]

hi

[Capricious]

Not really. Me and Zindaras have a history, a history in which he wwas factually scum every time but one. So I am trained to be suspicious of him now. I'm still posting out side of that suspicion, but as the number of players dwindle, the more likely i will be to push for his lynch.

Him being scum in other games makes no difference to this game. This post is completely irrelevant.
Is there anything productive you'd like to add?

Skruffs was just trying to say he's metagaming. He was trying to be productive. Y was just taking the literal approach, in fact, my vote on Y was based on meta.

[Capricious]

Interesting how the people under suspicion have disappeared a few days before the activity-based deadline comes into effect.

We need to consider whether we can reach a compromise lynch, and whether that would be better than a no-lynch.

I'm not really seeing the case on Andycyca at the moment, but I would be prepared to switch my vote to Rotten Snitch when deadline hits as a poor substitute for lynching Capriscum.
Capricious is definitely my number one lynch choice though.

Ok, I don't understand a compromise lynch. Are we to compromise with the scum to lynch a vanilla instead of a power role or whatnot?

Or, do you see this as partisan? that one side wants to lynch Andycyca, the other wants to lynch me, so we lynch Rotten Snitch in the middle as a compromise. I don't understand.

[Capricious]

I think RS is pretty scummy at the moment. I especially don't like his responses.

the vagueness is overwhelming =O

Sir T's post there had more content than your "Wagon wagon wagon!" vote post. Just sayin'.

False.

[Zindaras]

So, I kind of think hasdfgas is reaching a bit in 63. I don't think Mizzy's post there says that the early pages are completely useless. Kinda agree with her 67. Andycyca basically repeats hasdfgas in 69. Rotten Snitch's 71 is somewhat odd. I like hasdfgas's 76. I like Mizzy's 78 less. I don't think there is any reason to speculate about things like that at this point, or any point soon, for that matter. Behaviour is still Reason #1 for a lynch. I think both Skruffs's and Sir T's reasons for attacking me are far-fetched to say the least. Capricious's entire play in the first few pages is based purely on going back through old games and pointing out instances were something would or would not be a good decision...ignoring whether or not they are applicable to the current situation. He seems to abandon the approach in 103. Not sure if I like the explanation, currently I'm buying it.

Ah, but if I had voted you would be calling me scummy for putting a fourth vote on you for little reason. If you had less than 3 votes on you currently, it would have been a vote, but putting you at L-2 at this point is a bit harsh

this is false, contrary to popular opinion, I do not believe L-2 and L-1 votes are scummy just because they are L-2 and L-1. The scummiest votes, I believe are the keystone votes, the votes that propel the wagon to a point of no return. This may be even the 2nd or 3rd vote, or it may be a later vote.

I actually find this somewhat amusing. Tells are invariably based on popular opinion. I believe jeep posted some theory about how docs and Mafia behaved, purely mathematically. And he was right. Tells are beautiful. But when they get out, they're out, and they don't work anymore. From a pure perspective, however, I would make an exception for some tells, most importantly tells that have to do with voting, simply because the Mafia need to get what they want (dead town) and they have to vote for it. This is especially true in situations where the lynch is close.

But I digress. I love theory too much.

I think the Y-Capricious exchange in 111-117 is odd. In this case, it seems like Y is overanalyzing (though Capricious is doing some silly speculation, in my opinion).

Andycyca's 123 is odd, as pointed out before. Easy talk about distancing. Skruffs's 130 is flat-out worthless. Speculating on why someone was killed is useless. We can't infer anything from it at this point. Rotten Snitch's 135 is actually an example of pure WIFOM. Don't see those often.

I remember Patrick and Ether saying they had promised scum roles to SEVERAL people before roles were actually sent out. I do not think if they were actually legitimately promising roles, they would have said so out loud, but SINCE the topic of the chat at that time WAS about Ether's game, the theme of which would only be noted as that of "werewolves", I think that it is VERY likely that someone may have overheard it, thought nothing of it, and then remembered during Night 0 when they said "Hmm...' and used it as a reason, for the sole point of creating a situation.

I'm not actually trying to make a situation of it myself, I am merely putting this information out there so that it can be acknowledged and discarded.

Why put worthless info in the thread?

Blech, tired, need to skim now.

Y's 162 is odd. "Why is Capricious forgotten?"

Well, why don't you put him in the spotlights? You're not even voting him.

I also really friggin' love the fact that Skruffs basically says I'm scum because I'm always scum and insinuating that he shouldn't be held accountable if I turn up town, because he's trained to kill me.

Yeah, right.

Sir T obviously fails to acknowledge my personality, don't know if it's scum stubbornness or simply town paranoia. Elmo is giving me "cruise"-vibes. He's basically cruising through the game without really saying anything.

I'm going to

Unvote

for now and think more about this tomorrow, where I will hopefully be less tired.

[Elmo]

24 hours until the "ya gotta post!" deadline thing starts.

Mea culpa on the cruising. I'll try and, you know, actually do something when I wake up. I'd go for anyone on my list from before for lynchin' purposes.

[Skruffs]

Zindaras, why bitch about worthless info if it's not really worthless, and if you aren't adding any yourself?

You are playing like a superstar, just giving anecdotal analysis without putting yourself 'out there' at all, and even discouraging other players from doing so. Attempt to look ::wise:: without putting yourself in a position to be analyzed. IE flying under the radar. IE what you did in two other games as scum, that I have been in, and after starting the game the exact same way as you did in a Third game, that you were scum in, in which you started by voting me for a bad reason then dropped it to look town later on.

So, regardless of the fact that you have been scum recently, my actual basis for suspicion on you is on your play in this game. If you tend to start bad bandwagons as town in other games, give me an example or two. But if you want me to just say "Oh it's zindaras, yay, so happy to see you" then you can forget it, I've been burned and I'm not giving you any benefits until I have a good reason to; a reason, through your actions this game, that you are not giving me.

[Zindaras]

You are playing like a superstar, just giving anecdotal analysis without putting yourself 'out there' at all

Oh really? I've pointed out several things, and I've given my opinion on pretty much everything of substance that has happened.

and even discouraging other players from doing so.

You can make assertions, but you have to back them up.

Attempt to look ::wise:: without putting yourself in a position to be analyzed. IE flying under the radar.

Oh. So how can my post not be analyzed?

IE what you did in two other games as scum, that I have been in

And which two games would that be and how is my play the same?

and after starting the game the exact same way as you did in a Third game, that you were scum in, in which you started by voting me for a bad reason then dropped it to look town later on.

I've posted this before (where you completely ignored it), but the behaviour in California was completely different from this game. I started off in both games with a joke vote on you. In California, I expanded upon it, actually forcing a wagon and flinging out whatever crap-argument there was.

Clearly, only a foul scumbag, cursed by the powers that be (read: mith) into being a god-forsaken, evil semblance of a man, would, at this point in the game, use Condorcet voting.

Cease your pitiful attempts to protect the villainous cur, Skruffs, from our brutal and righteous lynching mob! Join us, instead, in our crusade against the evil Skruffs!

Perish, ignoble villain!

Compared to this game, where I immediately dropped it the next post and went on to other things, there's really no basis for comparison. And then add to that the fact that there is no reason to consider it odd behaviour to begin with. We have actually only played three games from the start together (so only three random voting phases). In the third game (Newbie 293), I started by voting voidybuns. And this is something you'll find in more games. My random vote is usually decided by who I feel like. If I do not feel like anyone, I will go with someone I am familiar with.

So, regardless of the fact that you have been scum recently, my actual basis for suspicion on you is on your play in this game. If you tend to start bad bandwagons as town in other games, give me an example or two. But if you want me to just say "Oh it's zindaras, yay, so happy to see you" then you can forget it, I've been burned and I'm not giving you any benefits until I have a good reason to; a reason, through your actions this game, that you are not giving me.

Starting bad bandwagons? Now, this amuses me, here. Where the hell did I start a 'wagon on you here? You mean Mizzy's vote, which was definitely influenced by mine?

Pfft, I go do that work thing, come back, and there's activity. Really, the nerve, starting without me!

Vote: Skruffs

because his avatar stole my fingertappies.

After that, I had already unvoted and voted Capricious.

All you have been saying so far about me this game have been spurious reasons for finding me scummy, laced with lies. For example:

Not really. Me and Zindaras have a history, a history in which he wwas factually scum every time but one. So I am trained to be suspicious of him now. I'm still posting out side of that suspicion, but as the number of players dwindle, the more likely i will be to push for his lynch.

"Factually scum every time but one."

Let's check some of the facts here.

Skruffs's games where he was in with me (taken from his current Wiki, which I assume is updated better than mine):
Newbie 293: Skruffs=Scum, Zindaras=Town.
Open 20: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Scum.
Open 35: Big Love: Skruffs=Scum, Zindaras=Scum.
Famous Cats Mafia: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town.
Mostly Mute Mafia: Haiku Edition: Skruffs=Scum, Zindaras=Town.
Mafia 68: Ork Mafia: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town.
Two-Headed Mafia 2: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town.
Meadows of Sorrow Mafia: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Scum.
California: Dantes in Fresno: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Scum.
Kingmaker II: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town.

Skruffs's Scum Ratio: 3/10 (30%)
Zindaras's Scum Ratio:

4/10

(40%)

So, what do we find? Skruffs is pushing the "Zindie is always scum" angle so he can't be held accountable when I turn up town, yet his "facts" are, in fact, lies.