Newbie 588 - Game Over!

[goborage]

Hey folks. <b>vote: no lynch</b> Can't we all get along?

[goborage]

no lynch

[goborage]

vote: no lynch

There we go. Anyways can someone explain the reason why random voting first day is better than no lynch?

[goborage]

There are 2 mafia. Anyways FOS on Cat for bandwagoning (correct use of term?).

[goborage]

The World No.1 Noob hasn't made a post yet and it's been like 3 days.

[goborage]

Unvote.

And...

Vote: Cat-Killer.

Why did you do this? You should probably post reasons when you vote, because if you don't it seems suspicious.

Okay, here's my reason.

First, I voted no lynch because I didn't really suspect anybody. But then...I thought it over and voted CK. Sorry, Cat-Killer.

And why did you vote Cat-Killer?

The World No.1 Noob

lol i didn't disappear, im just watching XD, the mafias know who each other are right? cos some ppl have been cooperating with each other quite well

So who do you think is most suspicious?

[goborage]

That's a pretty bad attitude. The game is based around discussion and keeping secrets to yourself just makes you look suspicious. Even if you're not scum your behavior is anti-town.

unvote
vote: mafiamurkrow

[goborage]

who has? i'm sorry if it seems like i'm hoppy its just well it was my first vote ever and i was excited but then realized its to early for me to make these moves other people look more suspisious than roland but he did scare me a litle...
so whos the scumiest to me
1. cat
2. mafiamurkrow(i also h8 poke mon lol)
3. goborage
4. roland
this is all just speculation and since roland is so far down the list i unvoted him he might just be on to something...

Grum can you elaborate on this list?

Mod can we get a prod for Abstract Actuary? He hasn't posted since Tuesday.

[goborage]

O I'm dumb, forget the prod.

[goborage]

Mafiamurkrow hasn't posted since Saturday.

Is this a prod request? I give 4 days before prodding, unless a player requests one sooner.

[goborage]

We have 5: rolandofthewhite, goborage, Grum, camisade, and The World No.1 Noob.

Dave and Cat_Killer aren't voting. Abstract Actuary and Mafiamurkrow are voting for Cat_Killer (Mafiamurkrow didn't unvote).

It'll be fun analyzing the votes on day 2.

[goborage]

These two are the most suspicious in my eyes:

camisade - sends mafiamurkrow to -1, "I agree. Or just lynch her because I've gotten sick of her BS." Seems to be pushing for a quick-lynch.

The World No.1 Noob - hammers mafiamurkrow without allowing a role-claim. Claims townie even though he isn't the one under suspicion - over-defensive.

About the no nightkill: Are mafia obliged to kill someone nightly or should we assume that a doctor miraculously saved a townie?

[goborage]

Based on these two posts it looks like Mafia Murkrow is at L-1.

Official Vote Count

Cat_Killer - 2 (Abstract Actuary, Mafiamurkrow)
camisade - 1 (Dave)
Mafiamurkrow - 3 (rolandofthewhite, goborage, Grum)

Not Voting - 3 (camisade, Cat_Killer, The World No.1 Noob)

5 to Lynch

AW BLEH. -has mysteriously disappeared for a while due to busynessism- I'm sorry for poofing. D=

Ugh. Do you not have anything to say besides that?

vote: Mafiamurkrow

And at least one person who thinks he's suspicious enough to add the hammer.

Mafiamurkrow seems scummy to me. See:

Unvote.

And...

Vote: Cat-Killer.

Why did you do this? You should probably post reasons when you vote, because if you don't it seems suspicious.

Okay, here's my reason.

First, I voted no lynch because I didn't really suspect anybody. But then...I thought it over and voted CK. Sorry, Cat-Killer.

That's... not a reason. Failing to adequitely explain his motives.

And why did you vote Cat-Killer?

Does it really matter? Besides, whoever I vote might get other people to vote for them too. And really, no need to know EVERYTHING...

Again, continuously avoiding the question. Add that to the terminal lurking and I think it's scummy.

I'm holding off my vote becuase that would put him on L-1, however, unless something changes my mind, I WILL be voting for him.

FOS: Mafiamurkrow

And all Mafiamurkrow has to say is . . .

Huh...erm,

vote: no lynch.

I have no leads and no idea otherwise, so I can't really lynch anyone.

Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail." Anyway, I think it's time to get a role claim from Mafiamurkrow.

I think this post is suspicious. It's in the guise of someone trying to prevent a quick-lynch. But what AA is doing is summing up all the "scummy" actions that Mafiamurkrow has made and making a case to lynch.

AA distances himself from the lynching by not actually voting for her. After all, throwing a hammer would make one look suspicious. However AA indirectly causes the lynch by convincing #1 Newb.

My question is why are you so gung-ho on making Mafiamurkrow look suspicious if you're voting for Cat-killer? Is Cat-killer not the most suspicious person on your list? Why didn't you make a summary of Cat's scummy actions?

[goborage]

I think there's some confusion with No. 1's post. He's replying to Camisade's example, not our game. The game Camisade is talking about probably didn't have defined roles which allowed for the false-claim mafia.

It's doubtful that they would but just to be sure:

Mod: can the mafia choose not to NK?

Yes, of course they may - Vel

@roland: Can you explain why camisade, Grum, and Dave are at the top of your list?

[goborage]

I think a simple "Mafiamurkrow is at -1, make a rolecall please" would have sufficed. Instead you quote a giant wall of text of people accusing Mafiamurkrow. Besides that, your defense works up to this point: "Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail." This is finger-pointing, an attempt to make Mafiamurkrow look scummy.

You then go on to say "Mafiamurkrow had acted strangely, but nothing to make me think she was scum." This quote applies again: "Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail." This quote proves that you thought what Mafiamurkrow was doing was scummy.

FOS: Abstract Actuary

[goborage]

I said it "could be." I didn't say it was scummy. It's not inherently scummy to make that statement, but scum could benefit from it. There is a difference.

I'm still not convinced and I don't the words "could be" absolve you from anything. This quote: "Seems like it could be scum saying 'I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail'" is too pro-lynch in my eyes.

vote: Abstract Actuary

Anyways has anyone given any thought to the setup? I'm going to assume we have a doctor as I can't see why mafia would choose not to NK.

* 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Sane Doctor, 5 Townies
* 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 7 Townies
* 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies
* 2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Doctor, 6 Townies

So I'm guessing either 1 or 4.

[goborage]

but the aim of the game isn't to not get killed, its to lynch the mafia and you'll win if the town lynches the mafia whether you're dead or alive, so if you've contradicted the mafia on being the doctor and you get killed whether by mafia or by lynch the and you're revealed as doctor then everyone will know who ever claimed to be doctor was lying and obviously the mafia. And plus if you make a contradictory with a mafia on who's doctor then it won't be likely for you to get killed by mafia because either you or the mafia will be lynched, if you get lynched first then its the doctor for 1 mafia (is this worth it? I'm not sure I am noob like you said lol but I do like to believe I have logical reasoning), but if the mafia gets lynched first then you can save yourself at night.

I don't understand what you are saying. Can you explain this please?

o and btw again why is it sane doc and sane cop? are there insane doc and insave cops?

Sane cops and docs will carry out their tasks 100% unless a roleblocker stops them. Insane cops and docs have a chance of screwing up their task.

[goborage]

OK so what Grum is saying is that #1noob is subconsciously claiming doctor by discussing doc-claim scenarios?

[goborage]

OK so what Grum is saying is that #1noob is subconsciously claiming doctor by discussing doc-claim scenarios?

yes...

I don't think this is the case. As I posted earlier #1noob is responding to a scenario outside of this game brought up by camisade.

Besides even if you are right don't you think it's an anti-town play to out #1noob as doctor?

FoS: Grum

mod: do you make flavor text when a doctor successfully protects someone?

No Mod will make flavor text to describe what happens during night actions via PM - would kinda give things away wouldn't it Never try to infer from a Mod's flavor text something about the game mechanics, it always winds up bad - Vel

[goborage]

what your asking makes you a likely target however as it seems your interest in the doc is only because you might be it. if thats the case you have already made yourself clear as a doc yourself wondering if you should reveal yourself as doc... but then if you claim it some one else might say their the doc... so you best hope your right about that question... why cuz you practically just did state it... IMO anyways correct me if I'm wrong...

It was an observation trying to help #1... and I'm sorry about that earlier post I was a little over hyped there. I just can't stand being pointed out for grammar errors.

How exactly does your post help #1noob? You're accusing him of being a doctor in front of the entire town. If anything it looks like you're trying to get him NK'd.

the evidence is clear last night the doc saved some one for all you know he/she saved you...

/facepalm the question is do we have a doc or is mafia playing with us?

You're flip-flopping here. First you say that it is clear there is a doctor and that he saved someone last night. Then after I confront you, you become uncertain. Which is it? How can you be so certain one post and not the next?

Fingers oS

[/quote]

[goborage]

lol, I'm not claiming doc, I was just thinking about the senario given earlier and how it would be good or bad for townie. Grum understood most of what I was saying but he didn't take into account the chance that mafia might get lynched first and then doctor can save himself at night so he doesn't get killed. Taking that into consideration then the mafia claiming doc would have been a really bad move on the mafias' behalf.

No a double claim will be certain death for the doctor regardless of who is lynched. A doctor cannot self-protect.

[quote="Grum]goborage one question why are you so very offensive it throws us into a defensive position which as seen with mafiamurkrow isn't helpfull... am I the only one seeing this?[/quote]

This is how mafia works. If I'm wrong, what exactly is the alternative?

Anyways Grum I don't find your answers satisfactory. I have my eye on you.

[goborage]

Sorry about that I did overreact there I think progresive observation and logical claims is the correct way to win not just pointing fingers at people because their confused...

I'm not going to apologize for pointing fingers at people. No one here is scum-hunting and that's a problem. The issue isn't me being too aggressive, it's you being too passive.

Any how I'll try not to leave words uncapitalized. So whos been absent from the forums it seems like( aside from those on vacation like cat killa) people are lurking around here. lets assume that we have a doc and a cop, and then we can progress.

I agree there is a lot of inactivity here. But you can't complain about it when you do nothing to stop it. Lead by example and post questions/ suspicions. The more you post and the more questions you direct at people, the less people can lurk and get away with it.

@ Grum: Why would you assume we have a doctor and a cop?

@ everyone: In order to promote discussion I think we should all post the most suspicious people on our lists and the reasons for them.

I'll start. Everyone on MM's bandwagon should be under scrutiny, including me. Chances are at least one of them are scum. The problem I find is that lynching MM seemed so justifiable. Most of the votes seem to have been made in earnest because of MM's frustrating playstyle. The only outliers I see are:

1. Abstract Actuary: Wasn't actually on MM's bandwagon but was in my eyes, pro-lynch. His summary of MM's actions gives license to #1noob to hammer.

2. #1noob: Did not object to MM's playstyle at all prior to the hammer and hammered MM very quickly thereby not allowing for a roleclaim. His only defense? "o, sry"

These two are the most suspicious in my eyes. Looking forward to seeing everyone else's

[goborage]

OK so what Grum is saying is that #1noob is subconsciously claiming doctor by discussing doc-claim scenarios?

yes...

I don't think this is the case. As I posted earlier #1noob is responding to a scenario outside of this game brought up by camisade.

Besides even if you are right don't you think it's an anti-town play to out #1noob as doctor?

FoS: Grum

what your asking makes you a likely target however as it seems your interest in the doc is only because you might be it. if thats the case you have already made yourself clear as a doc yourself wondering if you should reveal yourself as doc... but then if you claim it some one else might say their the doc... so you best hope your right about that question... why cuz you practically just did state it... IMO anyways correct me if I'm wrong...

It was an observation trying to help #1... and I'm sorry about that earlier post I was a little over hyped there. I just can't stand being pointed out for grammar errors.

How exactly does your post help #1noob? You're accusing him of being a doctor in front of the entire town. If anything it looks like you're trying to get him NK'd.

the evidence is clear last night the doc saved some one for all you know he/she saved you...

/facepalm the question is do we have a doc or is mafia playing with us?

You're flip-flopping here. First you say that it is clear there is a doctor and that he saved someone last night. Then after I confront you, you become uncertain. Which is it? How can you be so certain one post and not the next?

Fingers oS

Why 2 FOS's and not a vote?

Am I obliged to vote if throw out FoSs? To me FoSs are just a way of getting people to post.

[goborage]

Answer my questions please:

@ Grum: Why would you assume we have a doctor and a cop?

@ everyone: In order to promote discussion I think we should all post the most suspicious people on our lists and the reasons for them.

Official Vote Count

Abstract Actuary - 1 (goborage)
Grum - 1 (rolandofthewhite)

Not Voting - 6 (Abstract Actuary, camisade, Cat_Killer, Dave, Grum, The World No.1 Noob)

5 to Lynch

[goborage]

I'm not particularly suspicious of Grum. I've come to the conclusion that he's either newb town or retarded scum. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's newb town.

[goborage]

Interesting list. Can you explain why these people are on it?

[goborage]

Well for Dave I Dave I agree with RTW's statement earlier - He seems to be popping in when he's needed and then disappearing. Also, a really exuberant reaction (e.g. "Awesome") to something that is beneficial to the town (such as a Mafia lynch or no kill at night) is sometimes an example of Mafia trying to act like townspeople, especially among new people who don't know any better. Then again, he wasn't on the Mafiamurkrow wagon (or any wagon), which makes me wonder if he's trying to fade into the background.

I agree that Dave only seems to pop in like Lassie when his name is called. IMO the "Awesome" reaction isn't really a scum tell. The same reaction could be a townie who doesn't know better. And "trying to fade into the background?" Please, he already has.

I think it's interesting that you'd defend Dave and not yourself. I'm not entirely sure what, if anything, to make of this.

Besides that, I agree with #1noob when he says you aren't scum-hunting. Do you have anything to say about this? And where's that list you said you'd make?

[goborage]

And all Mafiamurkrow has to say is . . .

Huh...erm,

vote: no lynch.

I have no leads and no idea otherwise, so I can't really lynch anyone.

Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail."

[quote="AA]Mafiamurkrow had acted strangely, but nothing to make me think she was scum.[/quote]

I still think there is a contradiction between these two posts that you have not adequately explained.

Anyways this thread is way too inactive. Where are those lists everyone said they'd make?

mod

: Can you prod Dave? He hasn't posted since Saturday.

Done - Vel

[goborage]

Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail."

This is what I said. The key words are "could be". Most things that people do you could look at and say, "Would scum say something like this?", "Why would they say something like this?" and "How would they say something like this?"

In this instance I looked at what he had said while he was at L-1 (most likely unbeknownst to him) and gave what a scum in his position could be thinking. There is a key difference. I didn't say what he said made him more likely to be scum, or was even a scummy statement in itself. I just showed what scum would have been thinking and doing in that sentence.

And why would you do this at all? Do you regularly place insinuations in people's posts? How can you deny that your post does not make MM look bad to the rest of town? You're giving a scummy flavour to MM's post; one that was not there before.

And here is what you say I am contradicting.

Mafiamurkrow had acted strangely, but nothing to make me think she was scum.

Even if you think this is a contradiction (I disagree), it doesn't imply anything. The contention is that I somehow caused the Mafiamurkrow lynch. The point of my post was to do the opposite. It isn't a post that a mafia member, especially an experienced player, would be likely to do (try to slow down the lynch and get a claim - very protown). I could never have foreseen that that post could cause someone to drop the hammer when it's purpose is to warn people not to drop the hammer.

The contradiction that I see is your pro-MM lynch post vs your anti-MM lynch stance you later took. It implies that you are distancing yourself from the MM lynch even though you were for it.

[goborage]

Well all I can say is I really did think that he was asking for my role claim. And to the hammer, well I didn't even know what a hammer was when I voted but as I say I do still defend Camisade's vote on Maf, at the time it was the reasonable thing to do. But I guess it really goes down to if you believe me or not because I do admit that however you look at it I did do something wrong.

Why would you bring up Camisade out of the blue? The question is directed at you, not him.

[goborage]

I think it scares him a little because you are such an experienced player and thats just what a skilled mafia player would do...

A skilled mafia player would not do that. A skilled mafia member would rather not mention it at all in the hopes that someone reads a good case against the target and votes with it, not realizing it was the hammer. One point of my post was to point out that the next vote would be the hammer. A mafia member would rather that fact is not known.

Or if scum wanted to make themselves look pro-town they would rush to be the first one to point it out.

And why would you do this at all? Do you regularly place insinuations in people's posts? How can you deny that your post does not make MM look bad to the rest of town? You're giving a scummy flavour to MM's post; one that was not there before.

Yes, I like to try to read into posts and see what that person's motivations could have been as town and scum. In this situation at L-1 I didn't know if Mafiamurkrow was aware of the situation and was daftly avoiding giving more information as scum, or he was completely unaware. The post sounded simply unaware, but I wanted the rest of the town to realize the other possibility and especially I wanted to add pressure to Mafiamurkrow to elaborate his suspicions and name names. That was the point of the sentence. "MM, you aren't allowed to go quietly into the night. Name some names."

When you first defended yourself, you said that your post was purely to inform town that MM was at L-1 and that you didn't think she was scummy. Now you say you were pressuring MM. Why would a guy not suspicious of MM pressure her?

Let's look at the quote again: Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail."

You then offer this explanation: I wanted to add pressure to Mafiamurkrow to elaborate his suspicions and name names. That was the point of the sentence. "MM, you aren't allowed to go quietly into the night. Name some names."

I'm having trouble connecting your MM post with your explanation. Your MM post is not a question; it's not even directed at MM. It's directed at town. If you wanted MM to list her suspicions why wouldn't you just ask?

The contradiction that I see is your

pro-MM lynch post

vs

your anti-MM lynch stance

you later took. It implies that you are distancing yourself from the MM lynch even though you were for it.

The contradiction either doesn't exist or it doesn't matter. There are two parts of your post that are incorrect.

Of course it matters. I read your "I didn't find MM scummy" post as a lie. There's an accepted doctrine called Lynch-All-Liars of which I am a proponent of.

Other than that I haven't picked out anything from any other voters that struck me as suspicious. As the game progresses and I reread the round I may find something more, but for now, nothing else stuck out.

Here's another problem I have with you - your lack of scum-hunting. Beyond defending yourself, you don't really post here much. Day one you parked a vote on Cat Killer and pretty much lurked the rest of the day. You didn't develop a case against Cat Killer or ask her questions. And if you really didn't think MM was scum then why wouldn't you defend her or try to convince town of another option?

[goborage]

Just a quick prod request - AA, I'll reply to you later.

mod: Can you prod camisade and roland and Cat_Killer?

Done

[goborage]

Or if scum wanted to make themselves look pro-town they would rush to be the first one to point it out.

Both plays could have value for scum. In my opinion, the one where you allow a quick mislynch with no role claim opportunity of a townie has much, much more value over potentially gaining a minor townie point. A good scum would choose the first option.

I don't agree. I haven't been on the site that long but I've never seen a quick-lynch actually go through. Someone always points out an L-1 sooner or later. And if that's the case then really it's a race to who can point it out first and look the most pro-town.

When you first defended yourself, you said that your post was purely to inform town that MM was at L-1 and that you didn't think she was scummy. Now you say you were pressuring MM. Why would a guy not suspicious of MM pressure her?

I would like to pressure anyone and everyone I can, whether I find them scummy or not. That is a big part of the game. I still maintain I didn't find MM scummy at the time. My read on Mafiamurkrow at the time was "Middle of the Road" - a very viable pressure option. I wasn't leaning in either town or scum direction. This also addresses something you say below. I never said I thought MM was town and the lynch should be altogether prevented.

To this I refer to your activity. Where exactly is this pressure that you direct at "anyone and everyone"? The pressure you put on MM is a lone example. There is an inconsistency in your behavior and in your explanation.

Let's look at the quote again: Seems like it could be scum saying "I'm not going to name any names as to avoid leaving any more trail."

You then offer this explanation: I wanted to add pressure to Mafiamurkrow to elaborate his suspicions and name names. That was the point of the sentence. "MM, you aren't allowed to go quietly into the night. Name some names."

I'm having trouble connecting your MM post with your explanation. Your MM post is not a question; it's not even directed at MM. It's directed at town. If you wanted MM to list her suspicions why wouldn't you just ask?

Alright, I can buy that. It would have been more effective to address her specifically and request more information. On the other hand a passive pressure technique can also have it's merits, too. See if they choose to ignore the indirect request or see if they jump up and defend themselves at first chance. You don't get that opportunity with a direct request.

Passive pressure technique? Is there such a thing? MM ignoring that line is a null-tell to me because that line does not ask anything of her. If you asked a direct question and she ignored it, then it would mean a lot more. I still don't buy your explanation of the "seems like it could be scum" line.

The contradiction that I see is your

pro-MM lynch post

vs

your anti-MM lynch stance

you later took. It implies that you are distancing yourself from the MM lynch even though you were for it.

The contradiction either doesn't exist or it doesn't matter. There are two parts of your post that are incorrect.

Of course it matters. I read your "I didn't find MM scummy" post as a lie. There's an accepted doctrine called Lynch-All-Liars of which I am a proponent of.

I still maintain that is wasn't a lie. I also maintain that my read on her was middle-of-the-road.

In general I'm not a fan of any blanket doctrines. But if there was one I would blindly follow it would be Lynch-All-Liars. But the crux is understanding what the nature and severity of the lie must be to follow it. Something that is essentially inconsequential is not a lynchable lie. You have to get at the heart of, the purpose of and the effect of the lie for the reasons you lynch on it. This goes to my opinion of doctrines. You can't follow them to the letter.

Anyone who follows them to the letter is just acting foolish and is being lazy. That person is just looking for any excuse to have an immovable vote that doesn't require any more explanation or digging. Mafia members love to make votes like that because it gets them out of scum hunting or leaving any future trail for that entire day (or maybe even future days if their target is not lynched). Now, I'm not saying that is what you're doing, since your focus has been broad this entire day. In fact, my read on you is town, but that is not the issue at hand.

First off please don't talk of how pro-town I am while you are defending yourself. Maybe it's just me, but when people do this it comes across as an insincere attempt at buddying.

The lie that I am reading into isn't an inconsequential one. If your leanings toward MM did indeed change from Day 1 to 2 it can be read as distancing.

Other than that I haven't picked out anything from any other voters that struck me as suspicious. As the game progresses and I reread the round I may find something more, but for now, nothing else stuck out.

Here's another problem I have with you - your lack of scum-hunting. Beyond defending yourself, you don't really post here much. Day one you parked a vote on Cat Killer and pretty much lurked the rest of the day. You didn't develop a case against Cat Killer or ask her questions. And if you really didn't think MM was scum then why wouldn't you defend her or try to convince town of another option?

I agree, I would like to be scum hunting more. But unfortunately I feel that this issue has inhibited that for two main reasons. I've spent most of my time trying to show how this issue is a non-issue and it is distracting the town and this issue is distracting the town. Most of the conversation this day has been about this issue, The World's #1 Noob and some role possibilities, with the occasional player throwing out a list of suspicions.

Regarding my play on day 1: The day was unfortunately short. Something I tried to prevent. But there wasn't much that happened. Also, I typically play pretty slow on day 1 because there is usually very little to go on as was the case in this game. You can meta me if you want. I usually pick it up as the game goes on and more and more information comes out.

I doubt that you would be scum-hunting much even if I hadn't zeroed in on you. Don't try to blame it on me. It's been three weeks; I'm sure if you wanted to you could have pointed out all kinds of things.

Distracting to town? Have you seen town? No one is talking at all. If I have to point fingers at each person one by one to get conversation going I will. Besides attacking you, I've also asked you to make a list of suspicious people, which you have not done.

We need to pick up activity in this thread.

Great post. Nice to see a few words every 5 days just to avoid the prod.

Been away and from what I've read so far it seems that AA is only on defense and gobarage is still attacking every one its looking like AA is just being usefull but not worthy of being pro town(yet only because hes on defense) I'll hold off on my opinion of him because I want to see some real help out of him... as for gobarage... still pushing way to much and not helping with it.

Too aggressive? You obviously have not played much mafia outside of this game.

Hey Grum how about you try to be useful and stimulate discussion instead of coming in every few days to complain about my playstyle? Where's that list of suspicious people I asked for a few weeks ago?

[goborage]

This is the worst list I've ever seen. There is little to no thought behind it. If not posting = scummy then why isn't roland on your list? And where is the reasoning behind #1noob?

I like AA

This discredits you entirely. How much you like someone is not in any way a measure of townliness. Just because you don't like me doesn't make me scum either.

And how has Abstract Actuary been helpful to town? He has publicly admitted that he hasn't been scum-hunting.

[goborage]

Mod: Can we get a replacement for roland? He hasn't posted in 15 days - that's equivalent to 3 prods right?

Official Vote Count

Abstract Actuary - 1 (goborage)
Grum - 1 (rolandofthewhite)
The World No.1 Noob - 1 (Dave)
goborage - 1 (Grum)

Not Voting - 4 (Abstract Actuary, camisade, Cat_Killer, The World No.1 Noob)

5 to Lynch

[goborage]

I'm seriously considering never playing a newbie game again because of you Grum. I make you die on the inside? lol I might have to quote that.

Your buddying with AA makes me sick. He cannot blame his lack of scum-hunting on me and neither can you.

I'm scummy for asking prods? That is some bad logic; possibly the worst I have ever seen.

And why didn't you respond to my question? You still have not adequately explained your suspicious list. I'll ask you again: If not posting = scummy then why isn't roland on your list? And where is the reasoning behind #1noob?

[goborage]

I think I figured out why there was no NK. The scum were too inactive to send one in by the deadline.

[goborage]

I think I figured out why there was no NK. The scum were too inactive to send one in by the deadline.

You are being sarcastic right? I can't tell because this is typing no tone of voice to be suggestive.

It's a half-joke. I would not be surprised if it really was the case. I think our Mod has disappeared as well.

[goborage]

No that's a bad assumption.

[goborage]

camisade, in my opinion its odd for an experienced player to have the time to go on and say "lol" but nothing else.

I agree with this. There has been a serious lack of scum-hunting all-around but I was hoping the ICs would make more of an effort.

[goborage]

IC = inexperience challenged

http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... Challenged

If you haven't read the wiki yet you should.

This game is not being abandoned. We're getting replacements and when they come hopefully activity will rise.

[goborage]

Doctors cannot self-protect. Read the wiki please.

[goborage]

@ #1: I'm playing 6 games atm, which I've come to discover, is at least 2 games too many for me. Lol at the fake argument with Grum idea. I think the anger is in earnest there. I don't how many bad words I've deleted from my Grum posts.

@ shaka!!: Hey welcome. Looking forward to your D2 analysis. Ya I agree that post 43 was weird, but I'm not sure what, if any, alignment it points toward.

[goborage]

Goborage protects Dave for lurking. Looks incredibly scummy to me.

Never happened. I think you mean Camisade. Looking forward to the rest!

[goborage]

@ #1noob: Seriously, read the wiki: http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... reviations

Thanks for the PBPA Mokina. One mistake I noticed is regarding post 195. Camisade's list is ordered from least suspicious to most.

Anyways you definitely call some of Camisade's actions into question. There's post 169 where Camisade defends Dave and then there's post 195 where Dave is the second most suspicious. I'm curious as to how Dave went from defensible to suspicious within 30 posts.

@ Camisade: Could you explain the reasoning behind your list in post 195? Has your list changed since then?

[goborage]

Grum you should probably read some of the other games on the site. Maybe then you'll understand what scum-hunting is. BTW It's not uncommon for games to go 15 pages without a lynch. In fact I think general consensus is that the more conversation, the more likely town will get catch scum.

Mod: Can we get a prod for shaka!! and Dave?

[goborage]

I don't like post 142 by Gobo, he is asking everyone to make a scum list. Scum lists help scum a hell of a lot with their night kill choices. FOS: Gobo.

I don't agree. Scum start off more informed than town, so it doesn't help them all that much. On the other hand, town gains info from these lists such as buddying attempts, distancing and player mentality.

[goborage]

Hey AA, I haven't attacked you in a while...so where's the scumhunting?

[goborage]

Hey AA, I haven't attacked you in a while...so where's the scumhunting?

In the process of a detailed reread. Where's your recent scumhunting?

I'm scum-hunting by asking you to scum-hunt.

I'm not as certain about #1's townness as you are Mokina. The biggest issue I have is that #1 never seemed to have issue with MM's play before the hammer vote. This may be read as an opportunistic.

[goborage]

I'd like to hear more from AA. Apparently it takes at least 5 days for him to re-read a thread.

[goborage]

You not posting for 5 days is a legitimate problem. It's not as if we can't have more than one discussion going on at the time.

[goborage]

I would agree with gobo dave pair but don't think we should vote it out just yet.

Proof? Anyone can reply.

[goborage]

I'm not a fan of the Dave lynch. I'd really like to see him replaced. I think lurker-lynches are way too easy for scum to get in on.

[goborage]

Wow an AA-lynch supporter. I've been alone for so long. Anyways I think the Grum/me connection is pretty weak. If I was trying to protect him then I did a pretty bad job as Grum has been voted for. Regarding the whole FoS thing, I've explained earlier that it was just a way to get Grum to post. Atm, no, I do not think Grum is scum.

The whole Dave/me connection is also pretty weak imo. It's a knee-jerk reaction to my pressuring AA to post. I think the thread can handle more than one conversation.

[goborage]

I didn't word this very well; it was directed towards AA: The whole Dave/me connection is also pretty weak imo. It was a knee-jerk reaction from AA when I pressured him to post. I think the thread can handle more than one conversation.

[goborage]

No, it's not a knee-jerk reaction at all. I was genuinely surprised that you didn't understand the situation. I agree in almost all cases it is completely fine for the town to have multiple conversations. In fact, it is beneficial. But when we have a player who is openly and actively lurking the town has to force him to post. Starting other conversations and pressuring other people allows that player to continue to lurk. It allows him to be forgotten about. The town had decided it was time for Dave to actually play or be lynched or replaced.

In fact, if I had posted my analysis that is exactly what would have happened. You and some others would have focused on my hunting, the people I attacked would have tried to defend themselves (except Dave) and Dave would have continued picking up his prods and not posting, or posting once or twice here and there.

Also, your protection of him extended beyond that post. I'll quote others if you need me to, but you've said other times that you were against lynching Dave.

Even if what you're saying is true, you could have easily posted some questions to Dave along with the rest of your suspicions.

Please stop trying to link me with Dave. I'm against lurker-lynch not Dave-lynch.

[goborage]

O? so what other reason is there in lynching Dave apart from the fact that he's lurking?

There isn't, that's why I was against it. Lynching someone just because they're lurking is bad. It's much better to get a replacement.

Wow new Dave rocks. I dare you guys to lynch her for lurking. Anyways her post made me realize that #1noob's play has been inconsistent.

Post 296:

I agree to this, but I won't vote yet. (would that be a hammer?, how many people needs to vote before it becomes a hammer?)

Is this a real question? So far we as town have been using the newbie card to defend #1noob. But it's been around two months and I think it's starting to wear a bit thin.

Post 257:

I don't have much to say to defend myself for my hammer, I can only admit it was a mistake.

I don't know what to make of this. It's like two people are playing his account.

Post 223:

4.. Goborage - low level of suspicous things said, but somehow in my diagram you're linked with everyone, i.e. you could be cooperating with them. Having fake arguments with Grum was one of the probabilities I explored.

You have a diagram? Can you show it to us? Again this is an example of #1noob jumping from newb to proficient.

Anyways atm, I'm not sure what to make of him. What does everyone else think?

@#1noob: Do you understand what a hammer is now?

[goborage]

O yes and to the first part of Gobo's post which I seem to have missed out,

Is this a real question? So far we as town have been using the newbie card to defend #1noob. But it's been around two months and I think it's starting to wear a bit thin.

Gobo, I think the word "newbie" is used too much and therefore has changed meanings it means new at something, not necessarily bad at something. You and I were both "newbie" at the beginning of this game, we've both grown, but in different ways. You've been playing multiple games, reading wikis and learning fancy jargon. I've just been playing this one game, I don't know all the Jargons and I really don't have time to go memorize all of them. So yes I'm still newbie as in "new" to this game, but that doesn't interfere with my reasoning ability, when I ask a question its so it can help me with my decision making. Honestly how does me ask if my vote would be a hammer harm the town in any way?

It doesn't. I'm just pointing out what I feel is an inconsistency in behaviour. I'm bringing up the possibility that you are pretending to be a newb to make your actions seem less scummy.

Goborage:
- Why do you think Grum is town?
- Are there any other players you suspect now, besides AA?

Sorry I try not to defend players or prove their towniness unless they are under scrutiny.

I'm sticking with AA for now but I'm having problems linking him with a scum-partner. Anyone have any suggestions?

[goborage]

My mistake, I was using the old vote count as a reference. Anyways I'm a firm believer that "Grum is dumb". I've had this slogan in my mind for a while but I didn't want to flame him. It's something of a WIFOM defence but I honestly believe that no scum would act as dumb as Grum (love the rhymes). I think he played the game completely honestly. I am convinced that we hurt his feelings when we started questioning him. Take a look at the old posts where me and Grum are arguing. I can picture some kid crying while writing these. Only a townie trying his best to be a townie would react like he did.

I don't even know how to describe post 125. I wouldn't call it role-fishing - it's role-accusing. WIFOM again: WTH would scum gain from doing this? I think Grum was just trying to sound smart.

At one point I also accused Grum of buddying up with AA. AA just voted for him but I had come to the conclusion earlier that it wasn't a valid point. If you look through Grum's posts you can see a pattern of IC-love. There's a bit of a scuffle on page 2 between roland and him but it is quickly resolved and ends with Grum praising roland.

In conclusion, I have no beef with Grum. Were there any other points against him?

[goborage]

My mistake, I was using the old vote count as a reference. Anyways I'm a firm believer that "Grum is dumb". I've had this slogan in my mind for a while but I didn't want to flame him. It's something of a WIFOM defence but I honestly believe that no scum would act as dumb as Grum (love the rhymes). I think he played the game completely honestly.

I am convinced that we hurt his feelings when we started questioning him.

Take a look at the old posts where me and Grum are arguing. I can picture some kid crying while writing these.

Only a townie trying his best to be a townie would react like he did.

Of course, we might have hurt his feelings. But scum also have feelings, you know?

Scum also gets upset at being attack and threaten to leave. And not only newbie scum. Let me show you:

Case 1:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7283

Check the player "Guardian", during D1. He was heavily attacked by good and bad reasons, and threatened to leave the game due to his attacks. Guardian actually explodes like that often - no matter if he is town or scum.

Case 2:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6176

Banshee was scum. Check her last few posts - she gets under heavy attack, and also asks to be replaced.

Case 3:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5466

Ryuuk was scum. Check her posts. She got under heavy attack, and asked to be replaced.

So, the point is, newbie scum do quit the game in frustration when they get under attack, just as often (if not more often) then newbie town. Yes, Grum was dumb (posts full of lols), but realize that by defending him for being dumb, you're ignoring that he was dumb before the game began - so his alignment has no relationship with he being dumb.

Sorry would you mind posting a specific page number? The first game you linked is 80 pages. Admittedly I have not seen too many of these temper tantrums but do any of the links above have posts resembling 203 of this game? I cannot believe that scum would make a post like that. I think that even the newbiest of scum would show some restraint and not be so emotional.

I don't even know how to describe post 125. I wouldn't call it role-fishing - it's role-accusing. WIFOM again: WTH would scum gain from doing this? I think Grum was just trying to sound smart.

What would be the benefit for scum? They sent in a kill. Next morning, the kill gets blocked - wouldn't scum-grum be dying of curiosity to find out who was the #$#$%#$% who blocked his kill?

If this is role-fishing then it's the weirdest role-fishing I have seen. It has zero subtlety and is more of an attack than an info-gathering maneuver. I think that Grum is just eager to prove that #1 newb is newbier than he is.

If you look through Grum's posts you can see a pattern of IC-love.

Indeed. I think that trying to please people is a sign of scummyness. Newbie scum often think that if they stay out of trouble (befriend everyone) people will leave them alone. This even goes hand in hand with his giving up the game. "I did everything right! I didn't offend anyone - why are you all attacking me?"

Ah but Grum's buddying is very selective. If you're an IC he'll give you the benefit of the doubt but if you're a newb like #1 or I he'll chew you out.

Were there any other points against him?

Sure.

First, let's look at Artem's post number two, where he attacks N1Noob and Camisade:

Case: The World No. 1 Noob and camisade / Spring Lullaby are mafia.

Turns out, I have

quite a bit of evidence on both

, but I will post the most formidable ones.

Look at these quotes, then read his lengthy case on N1Noob. Seems pretty strong, right? Except that a little later, I write a post criticizing his N1Noob case, and showing that it is based on nothing. What does Artem do? He changes his story. Now his case on Noob is nothing more than "a hook" for the more serious case on Camisade. He says he never had anything more than the hammer to accuse Noob. But that's not what he first said. What he first said is that he had quite a bit of evidence, and even told us that.

Eh. I read that as a guy not wanting to admit he had a weak case. Could be town, could be scum.

If you would like to see specific quotes or more evidence, I can provide them.

This backtracking does not feel strange to you?

Now let's go back to Grum. Look at his suspicions during the game:

that is a good point...i'm so bad at this lol. cat is odd for being so quick, i'm unsure but still...

- accuses Cat, but is unsure.

every thing seems to support the fos on rolandofthewhite for me i'm thinking about this as a crossover probably

just for now though

till proven otherwise...

- Again, he accuses someone who is getting some heat "but just for now".

every thing i've been saying is just speculation from me and others through reasoning personally i don't care so long as i don't get night killed

- Here he was attacking MM. When MM ask him why, he says "it is just speculation".

well it seems dave is a little quiet... thats not really a reason to cause any suspicion though but to be safe keep an eye out for lurking.

- Hey, dave is quiet. This is not really a reason, but keep an eye on him.

And this goes on and on. Don't you get the feeling that grum is up to attacking anyone, but doesn't want to look too confrontational? His suspicion list was extremely malleable, but he didn't start attacking anyone too strongly until he got under fire.

From a grum-Mafia POV, what happens is that he doesn't care who dies, as long as someone dies, so he follows other people's suspicions. And he doesn't want to become the center of attentions, so he is never confrontational.

I think Mokina said this earlier of #1 - newb-sheep behaviour.

Lol at Grum never being confrontational. If he wanted to stay out of the spotlight he shouldn't have made post 203.

[goborage]

"Goborage you make me die a little on the inside."

"When I say I like AA its not some kind of love thing"

"However you apperently can not control your self"

"This is not the salem witch trials your screaming and pointing at people will not persuade me."

"take alook at how fast he jumped on roland. How many prods has he requested for him?"

^ These lines are hilarious and quotable.

Official Vote Count

Abstract Actuary - 1 (goborage)

Artem - 3 (Claus, springlullaby, Abstract Actuary)

The World No.1 Noob - 1 (strappado)
springlullaby - 2 (Artem, Mokina)

Not Voting - 1 (The World No.1 Noob)

5 to Lynch (3 at deadline on June 21).

[goborage]

Now, I realize you're talking about asking to be replaced here, but I feel like bashing my head against the defense wall a little, so I'm going to quote Vel (our beloved mod - his will be done ) from post 213:

Hey,

And let me smirk while I noticed that you never bothered to point that out when Gobo used the "he replaced" argument to justify his position of thinking Grum to be town.

Funny, heh?

I forget, when did I do this?

[goborage]

I'm sticking with AA for now but I'm having problems linking him with a scum-partner. Anyone have any suggestions?

Anyone want to play this game with me?

@ springlullaby: what do you think?

Anyways what's the record for most replacements in a game?

[goborage]

So you're saying you didn't think of any possible partners when you voted for AA?

[goborage]

I've made my feelings about Grum/Artem clear. As for camisade/SL, I can understand why she could be perceived as scummy. Something that struck me as odd (it may have been pointed out already) are posts 339 and 361.

@ SL: What happened between these posts that caused such a 180 in your reading on Grum?

[goborage]

Claus has convinced me that an SL lynch is a bad idea. However I'm equally opposed to a Grum lynch so I'm stumped.

Anyways Strap's post has got my anti-AA gears turning again.

The World's No.1 Noob

People have brought this up already . . . but in this first post she seems to understand the value of taking as much time as possible.

The World No.1 Noob (84) wrote:
april 19th, well thats not too bad we still got 10 days to gather as much info as we can.


And later she is the one to drop the premature hammer.

The World No.1 Noob (89) wrote:
I agree with that, I'm not actually 100% sure she's mafia because her replies are too mafiaish, wouldn't a real mafia have thought up a better plan? But as camisade said her attitude is anti townie and its better to kill her to make things easier for the townies

vote: Mafiamurkrow Fixed - Vel


However, I've gotten a very strong town read on her other than this instance.

Pretty much nothing but good things to say about #1.

@AA: Where specifically did you find this strong town read?

kinda makes it seem like weak bussing...

If you're into weak bussing then you'll like this:

Cat_Killer/Mokina

Cat_Killer adds the second vote to goborage during the joke voting stage,

Cat_Killer (10) wrote:
goborage wrote:
Hey folks. <b>vote: no lynch</b> Can't we all get along?


It's [ and ] you need around tags.

Unvote
Vote: Goborage Just for the fail Very Happy


goborage FoS Cat_Killer for bandwagoning,

goborage (14) wrote:
There are 2 mafia. Anyways FOS on Cat for bandwagoning (correct use of term?).


Cat_Killer responds by unvoting quickly and not bringing up the issue again.

Cat_Killer [in 16, just 1 hour later] wrote:
Unvote
I'm tired and going to sleep. I will make further random accusations or actually play seriously tomorrow, when I'm awake.


She realizes she made a mistake and wants it to go away?

For a guy who says he thought Cat-Killer was scummy D1, he really doesn't seem to have much of a case against her. As mentioned before, AA parked a vote on CK, but never developed a case.

@ AA: Was this all you had against CK? Why didn't you pursue her further D1 or D2?

[goborage]

Posts @ AA:

- Why didn't you pursue a case against CK/Mokina D1 or 2?

- Yes specific posts showing how you came to the conclusion that #1noob is town would be appreciated.

- If you are indeed scum, throwing a vote on your partner and not developing a case against them would be considered weak bussing.

- There is 1 point I agree on. While I was considering SL's scumminess I tried to connect her to potential scum partners. For reasons I forget now, I connected her to Dave/Strap.

@ SL: My aversion to voting for an Artem lynch is mostly due to me not thinking that Grum was scum. What were the specific scummy points against Artem? The one I remember being pointed out most was the #1noob hook thing. I've seen play like this before (I guess I'd label it as a mini-gambit). The question is, "Do you think Artem made this play in earnest? Or did he just say that later on to cover up his weak case?" Even if the answer to the second part is yes, Artem could just be a prideful townie.

[goborage]

The question is, "Do you think Artem made this play in earnest? Or did he just say that later on to cover up his weak case?" Even if the answer to the second part is yes, Artem could just be a prideful townie.

Gobo, do you REALLY think that saying you have a strong case on someone, then, when called on it, taking it all back and saying it was all a ploy to be a pro-town stance?

If yes, then I have this wonderful bridge to sell you.

As for the SL/Artem "stumping" you mentioned, I could go for a Mokina Lynch. What do you say about that?

@AA

Could you make a short case on Strappado? I don't see much.

Strawman much? Unless I'm misreading, Artem's ploy was to fish for reactions, not to look pro-town.

Not big on a Mokina lynch actually.

The Dave/Strap case is mostly associative. In the event that SL came up as scum, I would link her to Dave. Dave/Strap haven't really posted enough for me to make a strong read on.

If I had to label Dave though, I'd say town. The lurker lynch on him pretty much got all of town on it. The only people off it were SL, Artem, and I. Of course this is all depending on scum not wanting to bus his only partner.

[goborage]

Now, I realize you're talking about asking to be replaced here, but I feel like bashing my head against the defense wall a little, so I'm going to quote Vel (our beloved mod - his will be done ) from post 213:

Hey,

And let me smirk while I noticed that you never bothered to point that out when Gobo used the "he replaced" argument to justify his position of thinking Grum to be town.

Funny, heh?

I forget, when did I do this?

Looking back at post 416, 419 I can see why you would think this. No, this wasn't my intention. I don't think Grum asking to be replaced makes him town, in fact I've been in games where the opposite turned out to be true. I was referring to his over-reactive posts, particularly 203. Now that I look back, Claus' post could be perceived as strawmanning, but it could just be my fault for not being specific.

[goborage]

Claus is making me reconsider my positions on a lot of players.

From 445:

- What do you think about Gobo's case against AA?
Poorly constructed. AA has been a constant contribution to the town and a semi-active scumhunter. It's hard for me to separate his role as an IC and his role as an aligned player, but it's worth a reread. I'll take a look.

I strongly disagree. I would never label AA as a scum-hunter or even as a contributor. He only posts to respond to other people's questions. Frankly, if it weren't for my pressure or for the newcomers, AA probably would have drifted through D2 just like he did on D1. But he might have come in to say that someone was at L-1 and sum up a case against them while not actually voting for him.

The posts that AA often did make without being asked for are ones involving meta or generalities - you know, fluff that doesn't give off too much about personal alignment. Why did he make these posts? To avoid prods and appear helpful, without actually scum-hunting. A lot of AA's early posts gave off a vibe of superficiality. Even post 330 wasn't particularly telling. A lot of what AA said was said before, and the people on his suspicious list were no one new. He has recently become more verbose (change in playstyle!), but I suspect that this is a survival technique he had to adopt with all the new high-content posters. Essentially, he is scum that is evolving.

@ Mokina : What was the result of that re-read ?

I think it's kind of interesting how your view of AA and I has changed.

From 238:

Goborage (178): Quite rightly accuses AbstractA of "poisoning the well"; after all, he brought up the possibility that MM could be scum and encouraged the wagon leading to a townie lynch. Well put.

Goborage (184): Presses the issue, unveiling naked WIFOM. I don't like it much. On the other hand, he makes some great points about a few of AbstractA's fallacies and notices a case of vote-parking I completely ignored.

AbstractA (186): Pretty much re-explains what he's already said... that he advocated for patience, pressured MM a little, but didn't try to get her lynched. Explains vote-parking away somewhat weakly, but I'm willing to accept it for now. Also puts mad pressure on Noob in a somewhat OMGUS move.

Poorly constructed? Well-put? What's with the love/hate?

[goborage]

Strawman much? Unless I'm misreading, Artem's ploy was to fish for reactions, not to look pro-town.

Anything to say here Claus?

[goborage]

Vote: Artem

Guess I was wrong about you Grum.

[goborage]

Assuming zero bussing the only person that could be Grum/Artem's partner is Dave/Strap.

Vote Strap

@ Strap: Who's your pick?

[goborage]

I should be more specific, they never voted for one another. You're right, Grum did talk about Dave's lurking but nothing ever came of it.

I'll let Claus reply to your post first.

[goborage]

I have read up to page 5.

vote: Grum very obvious newbie scum.

@ Claus: Could you point out which posts made you come to this conclusion?

@ Muerrto: Strap is trying to reinvigorate AA discussion.

[goborage]

@Goborage:

These are the posts in a first 5 pages re-read that made me first think "Grum is scum".

19 - "Fos cat for being so odd.. I'm unsure but still"

Wish washiness.

26 - "everything seems to suport the fos on roland (vote)"

What everything?

28 - When questioned, plays the newbie card.

31 - "Unvote, I'll refrain unvoting but that is very suspicious"

Wish washiness.

45 -

every thing i've been saying is just speculation from me and others through reasoning personally i don't care so long as i don't get night killed

"I just did a suspicion list a post ago, but don't care about that, everything is just speculation".

More wishwashiness.

64- Adds 2/3 of the players to his suspicion list (previous suspicion list + dave and noob).

=======

Well, this is page 3, not page 5. But by then, I was pretty convinced that Grum was newbie scum. Wish-washness is one of my favorite newbie scum tells. Does this answer your question?

Yes that seems pretty legit to me. One of the thoughts I was toying with was that you had an agenda the moment you came into the game. 309 is more of a Grum attack (which you admit) than a post-analysis which I've become use to seeing from replacements. I'm used to seeing town cast their net a little wider. But you didn't, and one could make the argument that you were trying really hard to be associated with a Grum lynch (which wouldn't be such a bad play for scum).

Anyways I'm sticking with Dave. If we hit D4 then I'd have to pick between AA & Claus. AA for the whole D1 "claim post" and Claus because of Grum's early distancing(?) vote on roland.

[goborage]

There's post 209 which sounds pretty reactive to a non-existent accusation. Maybe I hit the truth and Dave got scared? Makes more sense than a doc not protecting a cop.

I think I figured out why there was no NK. The scum were too inactive to send one in by the deadline.

Or it was a trick Perhaps, players that have been consistently active throughtout the game, are the mafia, and did not send in the night action to frame the less active players with a post like this.

Fos: Goborage

There's also 198 and 210 where Grum places Dave @ middle - high suspicion (classic scum behaviour?) but when a Dave lynch is discussed, Grum never places a vote on him.

Add this stuff to the fact that you were the only guy off the Artem wagon = suspicious.

[goborage]

GOBO:

What makes me lean scum:

-

The Dave/Strap case is mostly associative. In the event that SL came up as scum, I would link her to Dave. Dave/Strap haven't really posted enough for me to make a strong read on.

If I had to label Dave though, I'd say town. The lurker lynch on him pretty much got all of town on it. The only people off it were SL, Artem, and I. Of course this is all depending on scum not wanting to bus his only partner.

and then in the morning he says

Assuming zero bussing the only person that could be Grum/Artem's partner is Dave/Strap. Vote Strap

" where does this come from?

Where's the inconsistency here? I labeled you as possible town because so many people were on your BW. When Artem came up scum I naturally thought of you as a partner (if SL came up scum I would have done the same).

Review of Grums Posts:

Grum's scum list:

1. cat
2. mafiamurkrow(i also h8 poke mon lol)
3. goborage
4. roland

everyone seems to think there's info to be gained from these lists. AA says scum usually put their partner at the bottom of their list, gobo thinks they usually put them at middle/high. I think gobo is wrong about middle-high seeing as grums list shows confirmed town in that ranking. If it's usually towards the bottom of the list, then it could be gobo or roland. I dont think there's much to be gained from reviewing the lists though, it's a lot of WIFOM, scum could bus and put 'em at the top, or put them cozily in the middle for comfort, or put them last so atleast it couldn't be said they "ignored" them in the list, or they could leave them off completely and try to make them seem as town as possible. I dont think much can be gained by reviewing lists.

- for the 3rd time, in post 198, Grum protects AA saying he's being really helpful, why is he trying so hard to protect him?
- when gobo begins questioning AA, grum says "seems like he's being a valuable player to me" "my current thought is that abstract is really the most valuable player...calm and collect" would grum be so obviously protecting his buddy? It's a super dumb move, but Grum didn't really have tactics down well, maybe he really was being that obvious.

This is a D1? list. I have since climbed Grum's suspicious list.

Muerrto/spring lullaby, camisade (innocent)

Doing a re-read knowing that grum was scum - my mind has changed. My scumlist (in order from scummiest to least scummy) is as follows:

Gobo/roland
AA
Muerrto
and ofcourse Noob is confirmed town

Muerrto is innocent and on a scumlist?

[goborage]

What 180? I said I didn't have a good read on her. My labeling of Strap as possible town was dependent on neither SL or Artem being scum.

[goborage]

@ Strap: So you think Artem's partner was voting for him during the lurker-lynch?

[goborage]

@ Strap: So you think Artem's partner was voting for him during the lurker-lynch?

I dont think I'm understanding this question. I dont remember Artem/grum ever being on the chopping block for lurking, but it sounds like you're asking me if I thought his partner might have been voting him when there was a "lynch the lurker" bandwagon on him... is that correct or did I misunderstand?

If it's correct, again, I dont recall coming across a lurker-lynch aimed at grum/artem - but with the tactics that scum use, bussing, buddying, distancing, etc., it wouldn't surprise me if a partner voted or likewise didn't vote their partner.

If that's not what you meant, please clarify.

O my mistake. Do you think Artem's partner was voting for him during his lynch?

I'm guessing your answer is yes.

Anyways don't you think it's odd that Grum never voted for Dave despite all of the times he placed Dave on his suspicious list?

[goborage]

Do you think it's suspicious that he put dave on his list but never voted him?
Do you think it's suspicous that he also put Cat_Killer on his list but never voted her?
Do you think it's suspicious that he put you (gobo) on his list but never voted him...but actually went through the trouble of unvoting him before he left?
Do you think it's suspicious that he never FoS's or votes AA?

1. Yes
2. He did vote for me. Check Grum's post 31 (not sure where it is relative to game) and hang your head in shame.
3. I don't think Grum's buddying with AA is that suspicious. He buddied up with all the ICs.

590:

In summary - all game he's been saying Dave seems town, and nothing in my posts as struck him as scummy, atleast not that he's said in any of his posts...

All game? You mean that one post I made?

Gobo, how do you not see your view on me yesterday and your view on me today as a complete 180? You said you thought I was town yesterday, but first thing this morning you vote me and say it's because grum/artem never voted dave/strap - when the facts clearly show that there were a lot of players that grum/artem never voted but stated suspicions against. I think you thought a Dave wagon would be easy to revive, which is why you said your vote was staying with Dave and you've mentioned Dave in all of your "cases" ... but you've never once mentioned me. I've said a lot in this game, so I really dont think that you can hide behind the "he's lurking" and "she hasn't said enough for me to get a feel" catch-phrases anymore. It's old, and it's weak.

Catch-phrase? I said it once. Again, you are misreporting my actions.

You seem to think that people's opinions can't change, that they're set in stone. I maintain that my town-read on you was only there because I didn't think Artem or SL were scum. But even if I thought you were town for reasons beyond vote history, there's nothing wrong with me voting for you the next day, particularly when we have a confirmed and when the rest of town was on a scum-wagon yesterday.

I think you are scum, but I do kind of question myself because you haven't chosen a side on the Muerrto/Claus back and forth today, and that seems like something that an opportunistic/desparate scum would want to do today.

I think they're both town.

Do you really think I'm Grum's partner? None of those back-and forths sound sincere to you?

[goborage]

@ Strap: I forgot to reply to this:

Do you think it's suspicous that he also put Cat_Killer on his list but never voted her?

Here's a comparable situation. Grum placed MM at #2 on his list early in the game but did not act on his "suspicion" until a wagon formed.

Dave lands on Grum's #2 spot on D2. A wagon does form on Dave and there was a very real possibility of a lynch. However Grum never votes for Dave. Smells fishy.

To answer your question, no, I don't think it's strange that Grum never voted for CK. I bet he would have if a wagon formed. The fact that he never voted for Dave, even though there was a full-wagon is suspicious.

[goborage]

^ I agree. I don't think anyone wants to lynch either of you right now so how about you guys start looking at your #2s?

[goborage]

@ 621:

Point on Strap - I guess you'd label that as wishy-washy. So is that only a newbie scum-tell or does that apply here as well?

Point on Muerrto - I don't think his case is very good either but I don't think he's scum. Didn't you defend me earlier saying it's townish to tunnel on a single person?

Point on AA:

330 - Big re-read. Except that it has a few problems: he picks ONE post from each player (except grum) to make a case about them. Seems like he is hunting for cases. His conclusions:
Grum: Wifomy, but maybe newb scum. Buddying up to me.
Noob: Town read. (funny that he complains about SL's town read of Gobo)
Gobo/SL: Use a Gobo post to accuse SL, and an SL post to accuse Gobo.
Dave: Scummy for the Gobo jump.

Then he pushes Dave or Gobo as Grum's partners. This is what I see as bussing: He sees his partner floundering, and tries to tie someone else to him. Oh, he doesn't vote.

"And he defended 330 reasonably, so it is not an open and shut case."

When was this? I don't see any AA posts between 610 and 621.

[goborage]

@ #1noob: Enough to vote for strap and push for her lynch.

[goborage]

Mod: prod AA please

He's back to his lurking ways.

I don't really have anything to add. Vote Dave please. Claus if you don't like wishywashyness than you must hate strap's play.

This is irrelevant to the game but I don't think Claus made any personal attacks in his posts, Muerrto. I'd say grow a thicker skin; you're on the internet. I've seen ACTUAL flaming in games (i.e. "You're an idiot") and Claus is nowhere near that level.

[goborage]

Eh. I can see your points Claus, but Muerrto is still below Strap in scumminess.

Regarding the flip-flopping on being offended, I can empathize. To admit your feelings were hurt is somewhat emasculating. Even if the tears are plain as day my experience is most guys would deny until they die.

[goborage]

unvote, vote: AA

[goborage]

@ Muerrto: You think Strap is confirmed?

[goborage]

I'm fine with a no-lynch. I still think strap is the last scum.

[goborage]

Vote: No Lynch

Good night.

[goborage]

My eyes are on strap. I guess Claus could be making really elaborate gambits but I doubt it.

[goborage]

This isn't as cut and dry as I was hoping. Here are my recent thoughts:

It would be nice if the scum grew a pair of balls and just accepted that they have to kill a townie tonight

Uhmm...ok....
so, should we try the no-lynch thing again today..?

Lol one of you guys is a good actor.

Unfortunately I don't think either of you exhibit "classic scum-tells". And both of you have exhibited behaviour that seems very townish.

What I have against strap: I don't like the way Grum played when Dave was up for lynch. There's also the fact that you weren't on Artem's wagon. This is actually all I can think of.

What I have against Claus: I feel like I'm dealing with endless WIFOM. He doesn't do much to alleviate it either seeing as how he defends himself using the whole "path of least resistance" idea. Something tells me that if Claus played scum he wouldn't be a lazy player. His first PBPA was not a PBPA at all but rather one focused on Grum. An agenda perhaps? All I can think of.

What I like about strap: The doc claim. I hate how it came about but it really does seem to fit. Now that I think about it, I really don't think scum would limit their options and push for someone's innocence so hard. It could be prep for a claim but frankly I don't think strap would have planned that far ahead.

What I like about Claus: Posts a lot. I'll admit it, I fall into the group that believes more posting = more townish. Leading the charge against the Artem lynch also scores you points (but not without WIFOM paranoia). But that's about it. I don't think you outing the doc or hunting for it is a pro-town move.

Weighing both of you side by side, I feel that strap is more town.

I'm looking forward to your replies.

[goborage]

Hey Gobo.

seeing as how he defends himself using the whole "path of least resistance" idea.

Gobo, this is a big mischaracterization. I wrote "path of least resistance", because strap directly asked me about it. She said it was, I said it weren't. This is not my "defense".

You have used this defence on numerous occasions.

I wanted to point out that Grum was lynched because I went the trouble to push for his lynch, convince others to join it, and put down the alternative SL lynch. I need to be a REAL bussing maniac to be scum after all that.

This isn't the best example but I didn't feel like re-reading the entire thread.

It's called bussing, simply saying 'I didn't buss' is NOT a defense. And saying 'Why would I buss?' is WIFOM and you should know that.

It is not WIFOM. It is a statement. Artem had 3 votes on you, and I had 3 votes on Artem yesterday. If I were scum, it would be very easy to simply say "I'm undecided", and remove my vote from Artem, and let SL, no him, be lynched. I could even unvote artem when SL had three votes, then revoted him, letting SL be the first in the tie-breaker. THAT would be bussing.

Something tells me that if Claus played scum he wouldn't be a lazy player.

Gobo, don't you think it is a bit contradictory to complain about WIFOM, and then discuss how I would or wouldn't play as scum? Also, do you want to discuss my scum meta? (same question goes to strap).

Here is a hint - I don't bus my partners unless absolutely necessary.

And I should believe this why? I feel an air of WIFOM around you. The most questionable of your actions is of course the doc-hunting. There's the roland accusation, and the OMGUS-like vote on Muerrto.

What I like about strap: The doc claim.

Weighing both of you side by side, I feel that strap is more town.

Ok gobo - you didn't answer the first question I posed to you today, so I'll put it again, a bit modified due to your recent postings.

After strap claimed, you posted twice that you thought she was the last scum:

Here is D5: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 56#1179856
Here is D6: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 57#1190457

I asked you why you think she was scum, if you saw any problems in the claim. Now you went back on that, and decide you kinda believe the claim afterall. So why didn't you believe it then, and what made you change your mind about that?

1 re-read is all it takes. I recently asked myself, "Do I think strap is smart enough to set aside a townie for a future claim?"

Here's a question for you: do you believe strap's doc claim?

[goborage]

O so strap was the last scum. You probably won't believe me now but I was leaning towards strap-scum after re-reading and making that post against Claus.