Open 295 -- Island Paradise Mafia -- Game Over

[ZeroFang]

ZeroFang replaces bv310 effective immediately.

Oh, useless! ZeroFang's just going to lurk his way through and drive us further up the wall. >:(

(@ZF: That's me challenging you.)

Challenge accepted.

I've been reading a lot and I'm making a post, but before I do, anyone have any questions for me? Any specific events you guys want me to speak my mind about?

[ZeroFang]

This is up to page 5. I had not read beyond at the time of writing.

How lucky is it (for the Mafia) that they got the Vig, and for us that the Vig got his kill in (on a Mafioso), too! The irony.

Wait, we're not RVSing any more?

Unvote

I'm confoozled, I got here and RVSd and got told off?

I want to point this out. I'm surprised everyone missed it (except Jora, a page later). Not only does he comment on the results of last night (with

glee

), but also pulls the classic "Oh, I didn't know we weren't RVSing". I highly recommend everyone here take a class in The Basics of RVS Scumhunting, as well as reading Jeep's Common Tells. Stuff like this shouldn't get away unnoticed.

Even more interesting, DRK ignored this, and cj's defense of Sundy after calling ani out on doing the same. Jora asks about cj's aforementioned post, so DRK

flips shit

and rant-walls. This shows a couple things: 1) DRK is contradicting herself, 2) DRK has an affinity for cj (she refuses to call him out on anything), and 3) any attack on cj will receive a chainsaw from her.

The TT/Jora/HF/farside argument about lurkers was a ridiculous waste of time. It accomplished nothing. The other half (more like two-thirds) or the game was lurking at that point.

I expected a lot more content from

Y

abba. In the past I've found him to be a fountain of logic and content. This is not his typical style.

From page five, I currently suspect

Y

abba, DRK, and cj.

[ZeroFang]

Up to page 7

Actually, I saw this

@ Mod: Do Godfather appears innocent to Cop?

Would someone who is either godfather or cop ask this? NO
Would a cop blatantly reveal themselves to remaining scum with this breadcrumb? NO

I want to point out, in my limited experience, I've only seen non-cops ask this. Cops ask by PM. Scum would ask in the scum QT, or if it's the godfather himself, by PM. I hesitate to say Jora is not a threat, persay. However...

Does the single post by startransmission really outweight your accusation on DRK?

You protecting lurkers. Typical mistake. That's what all the lurkers hope for. They trying to stay below a radar untill RVS would over and one or two major bandwagons will be formed. The common practice shows that it profitable.

I'm going against the grain. But it doesn't mean that I'm scummy.

Actually, you're putting a great focus on voting for lurkers rather than people who have acted scummy. Which

is

suspicious in and of itself. If it were not for your other posts, I might be more suspicious of you. For now I'll stick with my belief that you're just an ancy towny. IGMEOY.

Or how's this...Good

townie

Rule #1a:

If you are town

don't ever vote yourself.

It's bad play, unless you are self-hammering as scum/jester

Fixed that for you.

[ZeroFang]

I'm expecting a lot of pictures of me being eaten.

[ZeroFang]

I'm now reading over HF's banter with Farside. This vote screams OMGUS. Maybe not OMGUS specifically, but it seems that he votes farside simply for disagreeing with him, rather than doing anything scummy (which IMO is along the same lines as an OMGUS vote). In addition to that, he has generally weak reasoning for his votes, and finishes with a "don't ask me for more reasons", casting his vote in steel, refusing any further discussion. This is extremely anti-town behavior and should not be tolerated.

[ZeroFang]

I hope you are lynched soon because this game can not progress alone on the ridiculous exchange between us perpetuated by you. Just keep you vote on my and focus on finding another mislynch to target or perhaps bus a partner or something. This exchange is getting us nowhere.

Now, here is a possible game-changing question. Is his attitude of "I hope you die, the game is constipated and it's all your fault" more likely to be perpetrated by scum or town?

[ZeroFang]

Wait. This whole farside/havingfitz thing... What?

After the last post by each of them, I have to believe havingfitz.

No one

keeps a calm and level head at that stage... Unless they were constantly Previewing and checking how scummy they sounded with their outburst!

No. If farside was more angry, or confused, or something... Currently, it's as if she's got it all under her control. Like she's driving this, and it's all going to plan. havingfitz is, IMHO, just another person who's gotten one or two of their posts torn apart by someone who's going down anyway, so has to make a mess of it all.

vote: farside22

This logic is just awful. Keeping a level head is a life skill, that happens to be useful when playing mafia. It isn't indicative of either side. Emotions, on the other hand, can be read, and depending on the person/situation it can be used to indicate which side the player is on. I don't have enough experience to tell what his lethal attitude shows, which is why I just asked everyone what it meant.

I'll take this opportunity to point out that farside is very experienced and very active. So much so that she used to be(?) a list mod, and after three years, she's maintained an average of 12.28 posts per day. It doesn't surprise me at all that she can keep a level head in a cat fight.

Call it pot-kettle-black all you want, but I'm still of the belief that scum are in the mega-lurkers. 'Cause there is no pot-kettle-black, that's the tu quoque fallacy. Trouble is, I don't know which lurker 'cause they haven't done anything actively scummy. ._.

If you'd like to pursue that belief, it's quite easy. Attack the lurkers until they either spend so much time defending themselves that they expose themselves as scum, or they are forced to become a productive, active player in this game.

I <3 you yabba. I'd love more activity from you. Pwease?

So, may be we should just lynch the animorph/bv slot as a compromise, and voilà! day is over, scum lynched. I saw star at least maked some attempts, but animorph/bv slot is a totally abusive null.

This post is exceptionally scummy. Suggesting the notion of lynching a slot just to end the day. What's more, Yabba was the only one that caught it, and he didn't pursue it like it needed to be pursued. This, coupled with the fact that Jora's been pushing lurker lynches instead of scumhunting raises my suspicion of him.

[ZeroFang]

I've read through the thread a couple times and I find yabbaguy the most suspicious mostly because of his combination of posting very little yet always being very hostile when he does post.

VOTE: yabbaguy

You've had three days. This is it? Really? REALLY?

[ZeroFang]

My main suspects are Jora (}|{opa) and havingfitz, for aforementioned reasons. I'm nearly positive farside is town, my only doubt stemming from the fact that she's a very experienced player and I wouldn't know her scum game from her town game. I'm suspicious of cj and yabba, cj because of his general ignorance and flaky/bi-polar posts, and yabba because he has not contributed to this game much, and I know he is capable of being a lot more useful. I'm neutral on DRK, her emotions aren't exactly helping, but she hasn't done anything overwhelmingly scummy either. Everyone else I forgot about, so you're obviously lurking and you need to

DIE IN A FIRE

post more often and contribute to the game.

I really hate to see half this game descend into the dark abyss of lurkville. It's upsetting. Let's see if I can make this clear.

Lurking ruins games.

And it makes them very unfun to play. If you're town, add to the discussion. Even if it's minor. Pick on people. Pick a fight. Some discussion is better than none, even if it's completely pointless. In town on town fights, you can still pick things up from the people shouting on the sidelines. Someone's bound to make a scumslip

somewhere

.

Don't fight with emotions (

*ahem*, DRK

). It doesn't work, and in my personal opinion, it severely discredits you as a reliable source of reason.

[ZeroFang]

ZeroFang replaces bv310 effective immediately.

Oh, useless! ZeroFang's just going to lurk his way through and drive us further up the wall. >:(

(@ZF: That's me challenging you.)

[ZeroFang]

This vote

screams

OMGUS. Maybe not OMGUS specifically,

So it "

screams OMGUS

" but "maybe not OMGUS specifically?" How can those two situations co-exist? It screams it but it's not specifically it. The "screams" OMGUS would appear to be an overexaggeration if you yourself feel it may not specifically be OMGUS.

That said...I don't care if my votes are ever viewed as OMGUS. If I find suspicions with someone I will vote them regardless of where their vote or suspicions are directed. So whether anyone considers my earlier farside vote OMGUS not doesn't matter IMO...what does matter IMO is you being so forceful in proclaiming it OMGUS and immediately stepping back.

I strongly believe that your vote on farside was a vote simply because she disagreed with you, rather than because farside did anything scummy herself. So you're voting farside and cite your reasoning as "Oh my god, u SUCK!". And you're content to just drop the discussion before the issues were resolved. That doesn't speak town to me. The only reason I'm hesitant to say it's an OMGUS vote is because it doesn't fit within the term's typically defined perimeters (you vote who's voting you because they voted you).

it seems that

he votes farside simply for disagreeing with him

, rather than doing anything scummy (which IMO is along the same lines as an OMGUS vote).

It "seems?" Way to take a stance (btw...why no vote atm?).

It seems. Yes. Because I know nothing with 100% certainty. Also, thank you for reminding me to vote. We only have 3 days left.

In addition to that, he has generally weak reasoning for his votes, and

finishes with a "don't ask me for more reasons",

Which reasons of mine do you feel are "generally weak?" Do you agree with farsides suspicions towards me? If so...can you remind me which of her reasons you agree with? Also...I do not appreciate you cutting my quote in half in effect creating a misrep.

I'm responding to this later, when I'm not in a rush to get ready for school. If I forget remind me, but I shouldn't forget. I cut quotes in half because it's more concise. Easier to digest.

casting his vote in steel

,

refusing any further discussion.

Over exaggeration seems to be your forte. Where did I refuse any discussion?

About right here. Re-reading I realize you simply refused to give further reasoning, and didn't continue

that

discussion. But thank you for pointing that out. I did not intend to make it seem like you refused

all

discussion.

This is extremely anti-town behavior and should not be tolerated.

<stands at attention> SIR, YES SIR! So what are your thoughts on DRK actually doing what you falsely accuse me of (i.e. wanting to restrict discussion)?

Also, did you plan on going anywhere with your "possible game changing question" and why haven't you voted anyone?

DRK has been moreso lurking/active lurking and avoiding discussion, rather than stopping it (although, that reminds me, her activity stepped up when I started accusing her. That's definitely something to look into.)

I did plan on going somewhere with my "game changing question". Due to lack of experience/social awkwardness I really don't know what to make of that, which is why I asked everyone for their input. As it stands I'm just going to let the game breathe a bit and see how that goes.

[ZeroFang]

VOTE: Jora.

I believe I've already explained why.

[ZeroFang]

@ZF: You outlined some cases for a Jora lynch, then went really hard against havingfitz... And then suddenly voted for Jora. Why didn't you vote earlier... And what changed your mind?
You seemed to come in here and just tell everybody that everybody else was scummy for this, this, this. Why did you choose Jora over everybody else?

Jora has shown a consistent pattern of wanting to vote lurkers rather than scummy players, discussing himself and the setup rather than scumhunting, and making exceptionally vague cases on a numerous amount of players. This post is a particularly painful read. All this, while making completely illiterate posts of garbage.

I'm still assessing HF.

Also, everyone else, I'd put a vote on ZF, but I wouldn't be able to unvote. If, say, three people chime in and say I should, I'm completely prepared to throw a vote down.

So you'll only vote if it's what the majority wants? Way to be a sheep.

EBWOP: also Fang's capitalized big font NO LURKING post was a bit much tbqh

I find this very interesting since you're one of the very lurkers I'm talking about.

[ZeroFang]

In addition to that, he has generally weak reasoning for his votes, and

finishes with a "don't ask me for more reasons",

Which reasons of mine do you feel are "generally weak?" Do you agree with farsides suspicions towards me? If so...can you remind me which of her reasons you agree with?

I said generally weak specifically because I'd have to list several points I feel are weak, and that takes time. But I'll give you a couple examples for your benefit.

Your 109 (ISO #2). You reference "aformentioned reasons", of which there are two.

}|{opa's statement that DRK is a GF and subsequent vote on someone with 2 posts who, other than the fact they have only made two posts, has done nothing suspicious.
-}|{opa pushing DRK as a good cop lynch. Why keep mentioning a cop?

1) I searched for what you were referencing, and I found Opa's post about how three people had made only two posts, and one of them (startransmission) was not contributing harder than the others. This was a valid, albiet (IMO) weak reason for Jora to vote.

2) Referencing that same post by Jora, you say he's pushing for a DRK lynch, except he voted star at the end.

So your "case" on him was very weak.

Your 145 (ISO #10). You reference your two weak reasons in post 109.

In the second section of this post you claim to have explained your reason for voting Opa. However, you simply refer back to the posts farside called you out on in the first place, that is, the one listing a couple weak reasons (and nothing else) and the one referencing those weak reasons. You beg us to look back at your posts when there's nothing to look back on. There's no foundation for your case.

To answer your second question, yes I did agree with her suspicions, but for different reasons. Reading it over again and again, I've changed my mind. I believe that exchange with farside was town v town (with confusion on your end).

[ZeroFang]

In response to Jora's post and the one after it:

These are two different schools of thought that appear very similar. On the one hand, we have what I hope yabba means, which is that the lurkers are among the scum, and we should flush them out and/or pay extra attention to them, since they're intentionally staying under the radar. What you're doing is voting lurkers for the simple fact that they're not posting much. The difference is that with the first one, you're taking measures to make sure the scum don't get away with lurking rather than saying lurkers = scum.

[ZeroFang]

I would really prefer a lynch on someone who's done a bit more, because this flip won't tell us that much, but at least it's a flip. My vote is useless on Jora.

UNVOTE: VOTE: TheJakalope

[ZeroFang]

I highly doubt an SK would have not sent in a kill, especially this early in the game. There's a million possibilities out there. I personally think it's a waste of time to try and figure out the setup when there's this much conjecture. We know VTXXXXX. It is very possible there's just one scum team who no-killed or got blocked by a doctor/roleblocker and the vig got lucky with his N0 kill. I will believe that until I see otherwise.

My computer basically died recently, so I'm using my sister's laptop. I should be logging on at least once a day, but I'll also be posting my thoughts in short bursts (this computer has less abillity for tabbed browsing).

[ZeroFang]

@yabba: You've mentioned TT several times, but not nearly enough to have a case on him. I'd like an actual case, or at least a more consice list of the scummy things he has done before I'll consider voting with you.

@Toasty I find your case on yabba to be equally non-existant. Little help?

Please and thank you.

[ZeroFang]

I can accept that, I had ISOed both of you at the time of that post. Sundy is on my scum list for similar reasons.

[ZeroFang]

Re-read forthcoming later today or tomorrow. My eye is on the Fang and the Farside, the lurker-turned-active, and Mrs. Experienced. I'm getting a hunch.

That's actually very wrong, on my part. My predecessors were terribly lurky, sure. But yesterday, for the part I was there for at least, I was one of the most active players. And today's been generally slow, in addition to me having limited access to a computer (and celebrating 4/20, but thats more of a personal matter), which actually makes me an active-turned-lurker.

[ZeroFang]

@ZF: Basically,this also my list
In my opinion, yabba has yet to make a good case, and I think he's looking for little things to attack on.

The scummy content from Toast is the lack thereof. Simple. ISO and you judge it.

Which is itself not a great thing to determine scum. Again, remember Jackalope lynch? Same. Exact. Reasons. The difference? I actually popped in from time to time--see if I could get a reaction to questions, but this game was...well, boring, and I was busy.

The first link was a small list of suspicions justifying your vote (not a case), and the second was a very general overview of your thoughts of everyone in the game. Neither are cases. Lack of content is actually a great indicator of scum, since it shows you aren't being active and participating in the game, and you aren't willing to let your opinionsbe critisized.

Jakalope was lynched out of necessity. We didn't have a large enough wagon to get a lynch otherwise.

Also, I just wanna point this out, lack of content and lurking are two different things. You have lack of content. The two guys behind me were lurkers.

[ZeroFang]

That's exactly why I pointed it out in the first place -_-

[ZeroFang]

@farside: Second is probably ZeroFang as I look at it. I've gotta be really careful here, but it's sort of a conditional on ToastyToast flipping Mafia. Fang is being very anti-Toast at the moment, which pleases me, but in such an outspoken and vote-free way that it could actually just be a distancing tactics. Realizing that ZeroFang is sort of on a quasi-V/LA at the moment with his limited laptop access, I bet it's a lukewarm suspicion-flinging at Toast.

I would be voting for him except he's L-2 and the day is still young. I like using the day as much as possible even if we already know who the lynch is going to be. The more material and information we have, the better. Sundy is only my second suspect, and he seems to be picking up activity. For the moment I'm holding off judgement till I can get a clearer picture of him.

I am very pro-TT lynch. He has few reasons for his votes, they're flakey, and he's spent a great deal defending himself as opposed to actually building cases (or even worse, turning people's suspicions of him into cases, i.e. yabba). I'd say I'm 65% certain he's scum.

[ZeroFang]

Also, this vote is rediculously scummy. Like, not even funny rediculously scummy.

[ZeroFang]

Re: your #482 post, yes I read what Jora said at the time, and agreed with him because he was going for the ZF lynch, and showing ZF's contradictions.

Maybe I'm just nitpicking cause you're voting me, or maybe I'm just the only one who noticed since it's about me. But Jora's reasoning wasn't all that great in the first place, and all you did was piggyback on him.

@ZF w/r/t ISO #19: your activity may have tapered off, but you stepped out of your shell and gave several reads on the game. That's why I no longer thought of you as a lurker with a null-read.

I understand, and this is acceptable just so long as you recognize that you're speaking about my slot in this game, and not my individual activity.

@ZF: Why is Toast scummy for his vote and not Fitz, DRK, CJ & Jora, who also hopped on a bandwagons with limited reasoning?

Because he has almost exclusively hopped on bandwagons with limited reasoning, in addition to being scummy himself. DRKs a wildcard, I haven't been able to pick up much either way on her. CJs new, and it appears his efforts are genuine. Jora's very hotheaded, but also provides plenty reasoning for his votes. Not that it's good reasoning, but it's genuine reasoning.

One more thing. If I understand you correctly, you just said Jora hops on bandwagons with limited reasoning, but he's also the main one who influenced you that I'm scum. How does that work, exactly?

[ZeroFang]

@ZF: What do you need to know before the Day ends? I have respect for those who realize that votes have the dual-function of also wanting to end the Day, but I'm not sure what makes you think the Day needs to continue

Nothing, actually. I like having longer days, it gives me more material to work with. But this one is growing stagnant, and at this point... well, there is no point. I think farside was trying to ask me something, I'll hammer as soon as I get a response. That could be later tonight.

CJ and ZF answers to my question are required.

You asked CJ a question. Did you mean to ask me one as well?

[ZeroFang]

I think farside was trying to ask me something, I'll hammer as soon as I get a response. That could be later tonight.

What do you mean by this ZF?

Read the very next sentance.

[ZeroFang]

VOTE: ToastyToast.

That's a hammer.

[ZeroFang]

ZF: I don't know what question. Maybe I'm thinking of Sundy. However since I'm thinking, who besides TT do you have a scum read on and why? Do you still think Fitz is scummy? Who do you see as TT's scum buddy and why?

That quote was was confused me, you seemed to be asking both CJ and I a question, and yet you only ask CJ one.

Besides TT, there is...

Sundy: Lurked the majority of the game, lacks much content in addition to playing follow the leader.

Jora: General non-sensical play, bandwagoning, and voting based on gambits as opposed to scumhunting.

I do not think Fitz is scummy at this point in time.

I could definitely see Sundy-TT scumteam. Sundy accuses toast early when it wont matter, and backs off in the very next post. He disagrees with toast a lot and think's he's scum, but always behind someone else. He's extremely forgiving of TT, going so far as to defend his motives, and suprisingly never pushes for his lynch even though he seems to be high up in his scum list.

[ZeroFang]

VOTE: ToastyToast.

That's a hammer.

I think we're at L-1, actually.

Shhhhhhhhhhh OH GOD DAMMIT YOU MESSED IT UP!

[ZeroFang]

Possible emergency V/LA for 5 days.

[ZeroFang]

I sign up to play mafia, then my computer breaks down, and just when I'm getting into the swing of things again, I get arrested, and then grounded indefinitely. And this is a slot that got replaced into once already. Oh, and it's a doctor slot =/