Mini 368: Town Of Suspicion - Game over!

[al_kohaulec]

Ok, LML's latest post makes me feel better about him now. His points

were

over the hill, but the reasoning was good. Trying to make PJ crack under the pressure, which didn't happen.

He also brings up good points on Mith which are true, and I thinkI've seen only one other person point them out so far.

[al_kohaulec]

We also haven't heard much from Pooky, but of course it's still early in the game.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Ok, CES's third unexplained vote is in fact very suspicious, but in the context in which it was used, I'm going to note it for future reference.

Oh please, I always prefer a bandwagon vote over a random one. That vote was in no way indicative of my alignment. A fourth vote, maybe, but certainly not the third.

Also

OMGUS strongest FoS: LmL

for exaggeration and attacking me over my playstyle.

Current scum group guess: Thok, LmL, lurker

[petroleumjelly]

Hmm, that's tell #2 going towards a possible mith-CES connection. I already pointed out the first:

Normally I'd vote for CES now, but I'm torn between him and MM for his self-vote. Either of you have an explanation?

"I

would

vote my partner, but I would much rather not."

And after we have LML coming in and voting mith, we have:

Also

OMGUS strongest FoS: LmL

for exaggeration and attacking me over my playstyle.

"You're attacking my partner! You're suspicious!"

As it is, I pretty much agree with LML's vote, and I might add my vote depending on mith's response. Also, I am getting the feeling that mith is

trying

to make keeping a random vote on Thok is somehow "suspicious", when in fact, there is nothing suspicious about it.

That said, I would like to see an answer to this question:

Why is it "suspicious" to keep a random vote on somebody if it takes seven to lynch, and there are only three votes on that person (none of them serious), and any other vote I would have placed would have been for just a random a reason anyways?

You are making it sound like I have an "obligation" to unvote if Thok reaches three votes during the random stage. That cannot be true, because then the obligation would fall on others into not placing a third random vote on Thok the first place, since that would result in Thok being at two votes anyways, thereby accomplishing nothing.

@ Alky: If M-M is seriously going to consider playing like Lloyd, bad, bad things will happen.

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

MM is doing a Lloyd imitation. I have no idea why.

That's a biiiig mistake. PJ will back me up on this one. (I sure hope MM isn't a mason.)

Ok first I have no idea who Lloyd is and how I am imitating him by self-voting, can anyone enlighten me?

I will Vote: Machiavellian-Mafia for now. The self-vote bugs me a little more

How is my self-vote bugging you? I just thought I would change things up from my usual random dice-rolling voting by voting myself and see how others react.

[mith]

LML, I

did

take a stand; saying that I didn't find anything pj had said particularly suspicious was disagreeing with your stated case. I could have said more, but to what end? It was clear you were arguing for the sake of pressure.

Considering my self-imposed posting limit, I've said a lot. Not my usual PBPA, I know, but I simply don't have time for that this week. (Today is "Football Day", for instance.) My posts certainly weren't content-less, though; I asked a few questions and commented on what I normally comment on at the start of a game: early votes.

Hypocrisy? Hardly. My vote was not random; in my experience, scum like to self vote. Obviously, there are other things I am watching, but for now, MM is at the top of my list.

Interesting post though. Starts out with your usual slightly-condescending routine (contrast the conclusion of "relatively shady"; not exactly damning). The mid-sentence switch from addressing everyone else to addressing me reads as contrived, particularly knowing that you teach English (plus the misspelling). Perhaps this is a tell. Let's see what you do next.

pj, I never said it was suspicious. I said it was interesting. I was curious to find whether your motivations were consistent and believable. I consider random votes to be worthless, but I understand that not everyone views them in the same way.

Now, back to entertaining the kids.

[lordy]

A little boy runs into the town centre, screaming for people to buy those newspapers he has on his diseased hands. You all slapped him and chased him away, digusted at how these modern day companies mistreat little boys, and of course, his ugly and sickly looks. He left behind a pile of newspapers while being chased away. Who doesn't like free newspapers?

Rosso Carne: 2 (AmeliaSlay, Petroleum Jelly)
Machiavellian-Mafia: 2 (Machiavellian-Mafia, mith)
Mith: 1 (loud mouth lee)
Thok: 2:Cognito Ergo Sum, Al_kohaulec
Pooky: 1(Thok)
CES: 2(Seol, Pooky)
Al_kohaulec: 1(tyfo)

12 in town, 7 to lynch.

[al_kohaulec]

Ok, CES's third unexplained vote is in fact very suspicious, but in the context in which it was used, I'm going to note it for future reference.

Oh please, I always prefer a bandwagon vote over a random one. That vote was in no way indicative of my alignment. A fourth vote, maybe, but certainly not the third.

Also

OMGUS strongest FoS: LmL

for exaggeration and attacking me over my playstyle.

Current scum group guess: Thok, LmL, lurker

Actually that vote of yours was more a point in your favor than a point against you, however, since I'm not able to note that in my notes, I'll probably forget it by the time I can finally open them again. For the most part though, yes it was no indication of alignment.

[Ameliaslay]

MM is doing a Lloyd imitation. I have no idea why.

That's a biiiig mistake. PJ will back me up on this one. (I sure hope MM isn't a mason.)

Ok first I have no idea who Lloyd is and how I am imitating him by self-voting, can anyone enlighten me?

I will Vote: Machiavellian-Mafia for now. The self-vote bugs me a little more

How is my self-vote bugging you? I just thought I would change things up from my usual random dice-rolling voting by voting myself and see how others react.

Lloyd's another player who typically began the game with a self-vote and mostly for the reasons you stated, and after the novelty wore off it got to be really annoying.

[al_kohaulec]

If you read Primetime TV Mafia, then you'd understand PJ's and my frustration towards Lloyd and how he plays as mason...

But it's time to get back on topic.

[Rosso Carne]

pj, pretty sure i said id hammah thok

[petroleumjelly]

pj, pretty sure i said id hammah thok

Pretty sure that's your third contentless post in a row. Likin' my vote.

[mith]

Yeah, I'll add a

FOS: Rosso Carne

. I can imagine (from watching him in scumchat) that Rosso might be the type to post useless nonsense like this, but he's taking it to an extreme here. I have a hard time believing that he actually thinks what he posted is a defense. Not switching votes yet, but he's getting close.

[Rosso Carne]

meh

on an honesst scale, first inclination is pjscum. the case pj has against lml is unfounded and crap.

course i'd still hammah thok, but pj is scum.

vote:pj

[petroleumjelly]

on an honesst scale, first inclination is pjscum. the case pj has against lml is unfounded and crap.

Since when did I make a case against LML? Aren't you the one usually telling other people to "read the thread"?

Still likin' my vote.

[Ameliaslay]

One thing I have noticed is that from what I've seen of RC as scum he starts out swinging.. pointing fingers, but I haven't really seen him as town...

[LoudmouthLee]

on an honesst scale, first inclination is pjscum. the case pj has against lml is unfounded and crap.

course i'd still hammah thok, but pj is scum.

[rant]

To me, this seems like a person who's upset that he didn't get a role that he's happy with. He's not following the game. He's just posting to go through the motions. It's an epidemic.. a far reaching one. I don't think RC is scum. I just think he's a vanilla townie, unhappy that his role doesn't allow him to dav-vig or be a pumpkin w/ lazers. I wish people would see the fun and importance of veing vanilla.

[/rant]

[petroleumjelly]

Gives LML a fishing rod.

I would suggest that Rosso neither confirm nor deny the above rant. If Rosso wants my vote to move elsewhere, not paying attention to the game isn't a good way to go about doing it.

[Thok]

Well duh about Rosso's comment.

I still find PJ's comment about his vote on me interesting. The fact that he was willing to leave it on me doesn't bother me (if he had just said I wasn't at risk and he didn't feel like moving his vote, it wouldn't bother me).

What does bother me is that he felt like he had to justify keeping his vote on me (with a reason he now disavows about me not participating in the thread), and that PJ accused mith of asking PJ to unvote me, when mith didn't do that. (He asked for an explanation of the votes on me, but never requested that I was unvoted.)

[petroleumjelly]

What does bother me is that he felt like he had to justify keeping his vote on me (with a reason he now disavows about me not participating in the thread), and that PJ accused mith of asking PJ to unvote me, when mith didn't do that. (He asked for an explanation of the votes on me, but never requested that I was unvoted.)

Uh... let me go over that entire conversation again, then.

I don't find what petroleumjelly said initially (or in arguing with LML) particularly unreasonable. I do find it interesting that he is still voting for Thok, though.

In my vocabulary, “interesting” is usually just another way to say “slightly suspicious”. Keeping a random vote on somebody means nothing to me, especially when there was no

reason

to take it off.

This quote hints to me that mith may have wanted my vote off of you. I read comments like these to mean “well, you wouldn’t be suspicious if you weren’t still voting for Thok… but you’ll be just fine after you unvote”. Like he is trying to nudge me in the direction he wants me to go.

Is there a reason I should unvote Thok?

He hasn't exactly contributed to discussion since his first post, and it's not as if Thok is in any danger: it takes seven to lynch, and the three votes on him are not nearly enough basis to even consider pushing for a claim. The level of play in this game pretty much assures that he is not going to be quicklynched or any such thing.

In any case, considering my scumgroup theory of {Thok, Machiavellian-Mafia, mith}, you asking for me to unvote Thok only helps solidify my suspicions.

As I mentioned, it sounded like mith was trying to make it obligatory for me to have unvoted you simply to not look suspicious when somebody else puts on a third vote (which is silly).

pj: Why leave it on? There was enough discussion to form better-than-random suspicions. I don't buy the bit about him not having contributed; the game was barely a day old.

Pressing me

again

about my vote (when in fact, the only other person who had really contributed at the time was LML, who I was not suspicious of), which I figured he (for whatever reason) wanted more explanation for, here:

When you asked me why I didn't unvote Thok, that was in Post 26 of the game. The discussion going on was solely between myself and LML: since I didn't think LML was very scummy in his argument (although I think he pressed it a bit too far), I didn't feel like voting for him. Nobody else had really "contributed" in the same sense, and since switching my vote would have been pretty much just as random as my initial random vote, there was no reason for me to move it around, especially when Thok was in absolutely no danger.

And here:

Why is it "suspicious" to keep a random vote on somebody if it takes seven to lynch, and there are only three votes on that person (none of them serious), and any other vote I would have placed would have been for just a random a reason anyways?

You are making it sound like I have an "obligation" to unvote if Thok reaches three votes during the random stage. That cannot be true, because then the obligation would fall on others into not placing a third random vote on Thok the first place, since that would result in Thok being at two votes anyways, thereby accomplishing nothing.

I did not have to justify keeping my vote on you: I was trying to force mith into justify why I should

unvote

you, and stating one reason I could use (if necessary) for not taking my vote off.

I am getting a distinct “making something from nothing” vibe here coming from both mith and Thok.

[Thok]

OMGUS much? (There's no vote, but the attempt to pair me and mith on relatively sketchy evidence is certainly OMGUSy).

I feel like you are making mountains out of the molehill that is mith's first post on the topic (if you notice, he also included a generic appeal asking about the Thok votes, in addition to a specific appeal to you.) None of the other Thok voters felt the need to make the long complicated argument about their votes that you did (compare CES or Rosso's [not a voter, but essentially in the same position] responses to yours).

I also appreciate the snipping/editting of posts to make yourself look better.

[petroleumjelly]

Are you trying to bait me? I never edited any posts, and I only quoted sections which were relevant to the point (i.e. those concerning leaving my random vote on you). You were expecting a response/defense, and I delivered. I do make a habit of quoting extraneous information, because it makes longer than necessary.

Concerning the other Thok voters, I would probably be the only one who

would

bother presenting an argument for keeping my vote there: I am well-known for being verbose in any case. CES never explains things in general, Al_Ko hadn't had the "chance" to unvote yet (and so wouldn't have to explain his 'failure' to do so), and Rosso had never voted.

There is no "OMGUS" involved in stating my suspicions. That particular connection was something that occured to me as soon as mith asked the question, and I pointed it out on the spot.

[petroleumjelly]

Obvious EBWODP:

*I do -not- make a habit of quoting extraneous information, because it makes -posts- longer than necessary.

[Thok]

Are you trying to bait me? I never edited any posts, and I only quoted sections which were relevant to the point (i.e. those concerning leaving my random vote on you). You were expecting a response/defense, and I delivered. I do make a habit of quoting extraneous information, because it makes longer than necessary.

You left off the second paragraph of my post attacking you, which explained exactly what part of your defense of my vote I found strange. That was certainly not "extraneous information"; rather it clarifies my major concern, which was the that you tried to justify your vote as something more than the random vote it had appeared to be (with the "He hasn't contributed to the conversation" comment, which really looks like you were trying to accuse me of lurking on page 2 of a mafia game), and then removed that justification almost immediately.

As for the OMGUS thing, either you thought mith was trying to attack you, in which case your counterattack was OMGUS, or you are lying about your interpretation of mith's post.

[Rosso Carne]

meh, ill respond to lees rant. im paying attention, but i dont post big long stuff cuz i dont have the time it takes to dissect every little thing put, and honestly, the posts made thus far have been really big reaches, mostly from what ive seen, mith or pj attacking lee because of vocabulary, and thok and pj trying to make me look like a doofus. i see no reason to suspect lml and pj is really reaching extremely ooc for him, and it just tingles a bit. pretty sure this is pj's scum buddies' chance to jump on him while the getting's good.