faerielord wrote: I disagree. -1 is a little too late for claiming, since someone could hammer before role discussion could be made. And sometimes, scum will want to go 1 for 1 (I'd think about doing it if he claimed vig)
So yes, maybe we can wait for the rest to come, but -2 is, IMO, the best time to claim.
Alright, fair enough. I still disagree (I generally think one scum killed is about all you can hope for out of power roles anyway, so let them quickhammer), but if that's what you think, I can see where you're coming from.
Unvote.
I'll reread when I get back tonight and pick someone else.
Just a quick post to say that I won't be able to post until tommorow evening. A friend of the family died so the last few days have been hectic with no chance to read the thread.
My read on him is he's a blatant lurker who will just lurk unless we pressure him into playing. A wagon to either his participation or his replacement would make me feel happy inside.
I agree with ThesweatpantsNinja. My thought with post 129 was to force him (=MafiaSSK) to post and hopefully add some valuable content.
Since none came (not even after FaerieLords post 130) I'll
Vote: MafiaSSK
I'll also say that my
FoS: ZeekLTK
remains and is even a bit stronger now, since he has tried to keep his head down some time now (seemingly to sneak away from the limelight previously aimed at him since new topics has popped up).
1-25- random voting
27- ice FOSs cake
28-29- mafiassk and cake would like explanation for 27
32- zeek agrees w/ ice, votes cake to "stir the pot"
37- cake offers longwinded response [useless]
39- SPN meta-discusses non-random votes [suspicious]
41- johoohno agrees w/ cake [?]
49- capcake leads w/ 3 votes (marmalade, TSPN, Zeek)
51- johoo calls out ice and greasy for meaningless posts [good]
53- TSPN votes ice for unvoting for no reason
55- zeek pushes cake lynch
56,58- greasy, ice attack zeek w/ FOSs [a little bit off...]
60- cake OMGUSs, votes zeek
62- mafiassk defends ice, orders others not to vote [dumb, but town]
67- greasy spot attacks post 62, posits scum protecting partner theory [weak, and scummy]
68- faiere agrees [still not seeing it]
69- marmalade votes greasyspot
73- ice votes zeek [mediocre reason]
75- TSPN votes mafiassk based also on 62
86- zeek leads with 3 votes (johoo, cake, ice)
88- zeek points out the dumbness of the votes against him [good]
89- TDC votes zeek
92- TSPN chastises people for whining about wagons [good]
96- ice continues to defend his vote on zeek [also good]
99- faiere jumps in, FOSs zeek and TSPN
101- TSPN reiterates his case for a bit more carefree play on D1 [okay]
105- zeek votes iceman for "fake" scumhunting [a bit OMGUS]
108,109- zeek and iceman find faierelord scummy for 99
112- zeek leads with 4 votes (johoo, cake, ice, TDC)
113- nano jumps in, votes zeek (5th vote)
115- zeek again decries his wagon, says there's "scum on it" [useless, scummy]
116- marmalade points out zeek's scummy style, doesn't vote [good]
119- johoo unvotes zeek, FOSs zeek [scummy. not clear AT ALL where he stands on zeek]
125- zeek again questions the legitimacy of the case on him
126- faierelord explains it again
127- TDC opposes zeek claim
131- faierelord votes zeek, fifth vote, wants zeek claim
136- TSPN votes faiere
143- Lowell enters [huzzah!]
144- TDC again opposes zeek claim, wants more from some players
146- TSPN agrees w/ TDC, calls claim request "fishing"
147- faerie claims he'd "think about [killing] if [zeek] claimed vig" [slip, maybe?]
150- TSPN unvotes, looks for new targets
155- TSPN votes mafiassk
156- johoo unvotes, votes mafiassk as well, retains FOS on zeek [odd]
looks like he was eager to find a different wagon, twice, but doesn't want to admit it. He had his vote on
zeek
, only to pull it while retaining an FOS. When he followed TSPN in voting mafiassk, he felt the need to stress his retaining of an FOS on zeek. This seems like pressing to me; covering his ass so no one can say "hey, what happened with your suspicion of zeek?"
The
CaptCake
wagon fizzled out for no reason. No comment, here, other than I'd just like to draw attention to it because I don't understand it.
greasy spot
looks really terrible in posts 56 and 67. His rushing to point out that mafiassk's post defending iceman (62) could be scum protecting each other just seems too opportunistic. And way too obvious to be true. There's no way I can sanely read that passage and convince myself that mafiassk just came out and openly asked others not to vote for his scumpartner. I can, however, make a big deal of it if I'm just trying to make it look like it matters. Which is what I think Greasy is doing. It's possible mafiassk IS scum and defending a townie, but that doesn't strike me as all that likely either.
For some reason
nano
's post 113 gives me solid town vibes. I couldn't tell you why, other than I'm a sucker for WIFOM and doubt he'd be so brazen as to jump in with a fifth vote if he was scum.
I'm also getting solid town vibes from
marmalade
, both because he's seen some of the game the same way I have and because i particularly like 69 and 116.
Others I'm not sure of yet. For now I'm not feeling the mafiassk mini-wagon, so I'll
One time, back in 'nam, Sudo was set upon by an entire squadron of charlies. He challenged them all to a game of Pictionary, which he won resoundingly. The charlies were forced to not only surrender the skirmish, but also their world-famous chili recipe, which Sudo sold to Texas for a hefty profit. Sudo is a master of diplomacy.
remains and is even a bit stronger now, since he has tried to keep his head down some time now (seemingly to sneak away from the limelight previously aimed at him since new topics has popped up).
It's been like 2 days since I posted, jeez. Calm down, it's not like I was posting all over the forum and not posting here, I just wasn't online.
FaerieLord wrote:I disagree. -1 is a little too late for claiming, since someone could hammer before role discussion could be made. And sometimes, scum will want to go 1 for 1 (I'd think about doing it if he claimed vig)
So yes, maybe we can wait for the rest to come, but -2 is, IMO, the best time to claim.
What is this suppose to mean?
So basically you're admitting that you are scum and if I'm a vig you'd quicklynch me (to go "1 for 1")?
ZeekLTK wrote:So basically you're admitting that you are scum and if I'm a vig you'd quicklynch me (to go "1 for 1")?
Where the fuck did I say that? You fail to notice that I want the claim before -1. At -2. How can I quick lynch you when you are at -2? Please explain this to me. Also, how can I vote you again? My vote is already on you.
Damn man, I'm loving my vote even more every minute
(1:07:08 AM) Xdaamno: alcohol
(1:07:11 AM) Xdaamno: solves this problem
(1:07:13 AM) Xdaamno: woohoo
Sorry for my inactivity. I have been running a Mish Mash HAGGLE game that really is time consuming.
Lowell wrote:
greasy spot
looks really terrible in posts 56 and 67. His rushing to point out that mafiassk's post defending iceman (62) could be scum protecting each other just seems too opportunistic. And way too obvious to be true. There's no way I can sanely read that passage and convince myself that mafiassk just came out and openly asked others not to vote for his scumpartner. I can, however, make a big deal of it if I'm just trying to make it look like it matters. Which is what I think Greasy is doing. It's possible mafiassk IS scum and defending a townie, but that doesn't strike me as all that likely either.
Others I'm not sure of yet. For now I'm not feeling the mafiassk mini-wagon, so I'll
unvote, vote Greasy Spot
.
Post 56 wrote:
ZeekLTK wrote:Are we going to lynch ScumCake or what?
Why? Because you don't like him. I haven't seen anything scummy yet. You pushing a bandwagon is though.
Post 67 wrote:
MafiaSSK wrote:
TheSweatpantsNinja wrote:
Unvote, vote icemanE
for saying "we're not in the random voting stage anymore but I can't be bothered to scumhunt. [/b]
Don't vote him. He could just be newbie town. My playstyle was exactly like that in my last game.
Man this reeks of scum protecting his partner.
So exactly what is it about 56 and 67 that makes me "look really terrible"? I would call it scum hunting. Post 56 Zeek was pushing for a Cake Lynch which Zeek got a lot of votes for because it was scummy. Post 67 - TSPN called out iceman for good reason and MafiaSSKsounds like he's protecting him. I call it like I see it. I can't help that. Are you upset cause I called out your scum buddy?
It's cute that you use the same logic that I voted you for to accuse me as well.
What I'm saying is I don't like when Z says "don't vote for X" then you jump in and say "EUREKA!! Z and X are scumbuddies!" That's not super-sophisticated analysis to me as much as it is opportunistically trying to look like you're scumhunting.
Faerie- I considered votes for either zeek or johoo as well. I'd vote for zeek at deadline, but I'd like to see GS get some of the heat he deserves.
Lowell wrote:It's cute that you use the same logic that I voted you for to accuse me as well.
What I'm saying is I don't like when Z says "don't vote for X" then you jump in and say "EUREKA!! Z and X are scumbuddies!" That's not super-sophisticated analysis to me as much as it is opportunistically trying to look like you're scumhunting.
hmm...opportunistic you say...Dude, the whole game is opportunistic. We pick apart what little tidbits of information and reactions we can until people break. So yes, I am opportunistic as well as everyone else that is playing this game. Bad Logic Lowell.
ZeekLTK wrote:So basically you're admitting that you are scum and if I'm a vig you'd quicklynch me (to go "1 for 1")?
Where the fuck did I say that? You fail to notice that I want the claim before -1. At -2. How can I quick lynch you when you are at -2? Please explain this to me. Also, how can I vote you again? My vote is already on you.
Damn man, I'm loving my vote even more every minute
I quoted you... I'll do it again if you like:
FaerieLord wrote:I disagree. -1 is a little too late for claiming, since someone could hammer before role discussion could be made. And sometimes, scum will want to go 1 for 1
(I'd think about doing it if he claimed vig)
So yes, maybe we can wait for the rest to come, but -2 is, IMO, the best time to claim.
What is that all about? A couple people have asked that (including me in the last post) and you still haven't answered it.
What even brought up the vig at all? And what the heck are you trying to say with: "I'd think about doing it (I assume by "doing it" you mean "scum going 1 for 1" as you previously said in the sentence) if he claimed vig (why would you assume that I would claim vig or even suggest that I might be a vig or rolefish to try and get the vig to say something?)"
Greasy Spot wrote:hmm...opportunistic you say...Dude, the whole game is opportunistic. We pick apart what little tidbits of information and reactions we can until people break. So yes, I am opportunistic as well as everyone else that is playing this game. Bad Logic Lowell.
vote: Lowell
Also I find it interesting that he (Lowell) attacked Johoohno for "not having a clear position regarding [me]" and yet didn't say a word as to what he is just as unclear on the same issue. This is all in his "recap":
Lowell wrote:56,58- greasy, ice attack zeek w/ FOSs [a little bit off...]
60- cake OMGUSs, votes zeek
73- ice votes zeek [mediocre reason]
88- zeek points out the dumbness of the votes against him [good]
He doesn't like greasy and ice's attack against me ("a little bit off"), he agrees that Cake's vote was an OMGUS, he thinks ice only has a "mediocre" reason for voting me, and he agreed that all the votes on me were "dumb" (johoohno, cake, and ice).
And then he goes on to say he would vote for me at the deadline, for no apparent reason at all.
hmm...opportunistic you say...Dude, the whole game is opportunistic. We pick apart what little tidbits of information and reactions we can until people break. So yes, I am opportunistic as well as everyone else that is playing this game. Bad Logic Lowell.
vote: Lowell
ZeekLTK wrote:What is that all about? A couple people have asked that (including me in the last post) and you still haven't answered it.
Couple of people...where? There is nobody (or even you count the one word lowell said than there is 1). That does not constitute "couple". And way to take things out of context. I was discussing why a -1 lynch is not a good idea, and said what I would hypothetically do as scum.
Nothing brought up the vig. I just said that if I was scum and someone claimed vig, I'd quick lynch him. Because vigs go 2 for 1 at times, which is too much for a 3 team mafia to handle.
I never said you were a vig. I was creating a hypothethical situation. When discussing things that did not happen yet, those are called hypothethical. You can only think what would happen. TSPN said that if he was scum, he wouldn't hammer at any costs. Does that make him scum for saying that he wouldn't hammer?
You are desperately trying to create a case on me that doesn't exist. When doing so, please create a good one. Thank you
(1:07:08 AM) Xdaamno: alcohol
(1:07:11 AM) Xdaamno: solves this problem
(1:07:13 AM) Xdaamno: woohoo
hmm...opportunistic you say...Dude, the whole game is opportunistic. We pick apart what little tidbits of information and reactions we can until people break. So yes, I am opportunistic as well as everyone else that is playing this game. Bad Logic Lowell.
vote: Lowell
Do you really think he deserves a vote for that?
That post alone no. But his saying my scum hunting act is terrible is worth a vote. Do you think his logic for voting me correct?
zeek- Unless I have strong townie vibes, I'd vote for anyone at deadline if it came to that. So to answer your question I'm not hugely suspicious of you ATM, but I don't necessarily think you're town. That you had a weak case made against you doesn't mean you can't be guilty.
