Mini 666 - This Could Be Mafia - MOD ABANDONED

[Erg0]

Thanks for keeping the seat warm, Tim. Voodo's probably relieved that he can go away for a few days without being lynched now.

I'm wondering how the voting affects things if it only takes three negative votes to prevent a majority from being possible, even if the rest of the town is voting for someone. Presumably there's some balancing factor here, or a three man scum team could effectively force a standstill on day 1 rather than let their buddy be lynched.

Maybe that's where the negative majority comes in?

Incidentally, for those unfamiliar with Tim's meta - go and have a glance through the recently completed Mental War Mafia, which Voodo and I were also in.

[Erg0]

Sorry folks, RL kicked my ass last week. Will catch up ASAP.

[Erg0]

I had read the game at the point when I made my first post, but I figured the Timeater thing was probably the most important for me to address straight away. I actually wrote a much larger post about vote mechanics and numbers for a lynch, then had to delete most of it when I realised that skitzer had specified in one of the opening posts that it was seven to lynch.

For now Im waiting for Ergo and his analysis.

It's pretty much too early for real analysis. Grimmy made a couple of obvscummy moves, but I'm not going to consider a vote there until he provides some sort of defence. There's not really anything more for me to say about Tim, I can only speculate as to his motives for dropping out when he did. I will say that he didn't seem to me like the type to shy away from conflict, though.

[Erg0]

What obvscummy moves?

Pretty much what nhat said in post 101:

OTOH, I like the grimmy bandwagon. He put someone at L-1 for a lame reason, then unvotes and pointed fingers of suspicion at two lurking players, even though one of those players was decidedly not lurking.

I skimed Grimmy's post and I feel so far satisified with it. Do all his voters feel that way or not?

This is a slightly odd thing to say, given that you apparently didn't know what the case against Grimmy was before he made that post. What about the post satisfied you?

[Erg0]

Tajo, are you saying that you did know what the case on Grimmy was and deliberately played dumb? I'm looking for an explanation for this:

I skimed Grimmy's post and I feel so far satisified with it. Do all his voters feel that way or not?

This is a slightly odd thing to say, given that you apparently didn't know what the case against Grimmy was before he made that post. What about the post satisfied you?

[Erg0]

The reason that i ask about that again is that this seemed to imply that your question about the case on Grimmy was scumhunting:

23.

Whats the case on Grimmy, huh?

(read the game and find out )

Stop messing with my scumhunting!!111

I'm not sure whether that should be read in a sarcastic tone, it jsut came off to me like you were saying that you were fishing for something when you asked what the case was.

[Erg0]

Incidentally, I'll do a roundup at some point. Are you worried that I'm too focused on you?

[Erg0]

Incidentally, I'll do a roundup at some point. Are you worried that I'm too focused on you?

You replaced a suspected player. I thin you can comment in others as well as replacements usually do. Rihgt?
And I dont get your question about my scumhunting. Rephrase?

I replaced in on page 4, which is practically as good as being in the game from page 1 (except that Tim left me with a minor mess). I would never normally do a player summary on page 4, why would this game be different?

Regarding the scumhunting thing:

1. You ask what the case on Grimmy is.
2. shadowgirl tells you to read the game.
3. You retort by telling her to "stop messing with [your] scumhunting".

This implies to me that your original question was intended as some form of scumhunting. Is this correct, or am I misunderstanding?

[Erg0]

Unpositivevote: populartajo

I'm not on board with lynching a claimed investigator at this point. Belief isn't so much a part of this equation as risk/reward.

tajo: With regard to me not caring about Tony's post: it was only a lynch -3 vote, I didn't attach immediate significance to it. It's been made more significant by the fact that you opted to claim at that point. Do you really think that half of the 4 votes on your wagon were scum, though?

Isn't quoting

from

your PM (as opposed to quoting the whole thing) normally a modkillable offence? By the same token, would skitzer leave us with such an easy means of confirming alignment? Posting the town win condition up front is pretty standard practice these days, so why is it missing here?

It all boils down to outguessing the Mod, I realize that. But for now, I'm going by the assumption that skitzer is a good Mod and that populartajo and TonyMontana are probably protown.

I kind of see this the other way around. A good mod would not allow players to quote from their PMs to confirm themselves as town.

That ligtning Muerrto wagon was... weird.

Yes, they could lie. But its a STUPID lie and is not motivated for scum motives : lynching me.
Dont you KNOW to analyse people's reactions?

I would have thought that scum motives were simply to lynch somebody other than themselves. Pretending to have the town win condition in your PM would certainly achieve that aim.

It seems strange to me that it took until Vivian's 296 above for somebody to ask for tajo's flavour.

[Erg0]

For now there was no flavour attached to my role. If you want my flavour name its Disturbia.

The movie or the song?