Newbie 595 - Game Over!

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Mike4876 has picked up his prod

Official Vote Count

Demonking - 3 (Litral, Muerrto, snafoo)

massive - 1 (Demonking)
Litral - 1 (Walnut)

Not Voting - 4 (massive, mike4876, starkmoon, Super Archivist)

5 to Lynch

[snafoo]

Sorry, guys, I'm not on the internet over the weekend. I probably SHOULD HAVE BEEN, it would have been better than watching the Arsenal-ManU game, but I wasn't.

And yeah,

snafoo

, it really DOES look like you can't make up your mind. There was this old saying I thought was funny when I was in grade school: "Fighting a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent." First you vote for the guy who hasn't posted in the game and should be replaced; then you vote on the guy who hasn't shown up to defend himself. Kick defenseless kittens much?

No, only defenseless mafiascum/villagers.

Actually, I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten

this time

(although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime). But given the lack of speed of this game I tried to initiate some more action.

But to no avail - looking at the recent election results in Italy it should come as no surprise that no one is really interested in hunting down mafiascum anymore.

[Walnut]

But to no avail - looking at the recent election results in Italy it should come as no surprise that no one is really interested in hunting down mafiascum anymore.

Well, I hope we are all still interested in scum hunting. I think quite a few people are waiting for Demon King to respond to the various allegations, and there may be a few people who are just... waiting. Obviously if you don't say anything you can't say anything scummy, but lurkers (as well as being suspicious for lurking) make particularly good night kills as their death gives nothing away. And no, that is not me giving hints to the mafia, it is me politely suggesting to the townies that they get more involved

[massive]

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and

vote snafoo

. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

[snafoo]

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and

vote snafoo

. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

That's an interesting way to parafrase my words. Please explain your interpretation.

[Litral]

Yeah, maybe we can wake up the sleeping

dogs

wolves:

Unvote

Vote: Demonking

Isn't that a reason that was given? Voting just to get an answer out of someone is, to me at least, townie play, because the mafia would rather the accused keep quiet and then lynch him.

Of course they could be co-mafia, but the chances of this happening is not high.

Anyway, how do you guys quote from multiple people? It seems that for multiple quotes I have to explicitly type them out?

[Muerrto]

Copy and paste

[Super Archivist]

Meh, I've been busy with school lately. x_x

What's up with Mike4876? Apparently he picked up on his prod, but he

still

hasn't posted...
And then there's Demonking, who has the most votes, yet he still won't reply... Those two are suspicious just for their absence.

Can we prod Demonking yet? He hasn't posted in at least four days...

[Walnut]

Thanks to massive for getting involved, and @Muertto for a good "I am here and watching you!" post. Fair enough too- I am inclined to go with Super Archivist and ask for a

prod on Demon king please

.

Demonking was prodded yesterday. No response yet. - Vel

It seems there is limited value in playing the game with half the players missing- if we get replacement(s) and Starkmoon is less sick and back from holiday I expect the game may be worthy of more significant posting from the various worthy members.

That said, in response to massive's

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and vote snafoo. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

Is it not quite common, especially on day one, for people to pile votes on any player to see what they say and do under pressure? I am not convinced that it is a good idea, mind you, but curious as to whether it is considered fairly standard.

[Litral]

I think pure pressure votes make sense, at least until there's a general direction... heated debates are good for the town.

[snafoo]

What has happened so far:

First we had Litral's random for Demonking and Demon's already infamous OMGUS reply.

Now you're in a newbie game as a newbie. That may mean that you actually did a scum vote first mistake.

What does his reply mean? He either is a newb townie or scum frustrated for being voted. Or he used OMGUS as random vote, which is quite common in mafia games afaik. What I found much more intriguing were the responses to Demon. First Litral makes my head spin:

Craplogic 1. You're in a newbie game as a newbie as well. Does that mean you just did an obvious OMGUS vote? This would mean you're scum.

I'm still not absolutely sure what he means by that. Is making an OMGUS vote a scum trait?
But then Litral gets some support.

Um...this is the random voting stage, you took that vote way too seriously

Vote: Demon

At first this post looked pretty innocent to me. But later on I started to doubt Muerrto's motives. Why did he jump to the support of Litral so quick? I think that Muerrto wouldn't normally take an OMGUS at random voting stage so seriously.
Then Super Archivist steps in.

Hello people! I don't feel like random voting at the moment because I like you all so far. Very Happy

When does this "random voting" thing end anyway? Does anyone actually get killed on the first day?

With this message Archivist became my first suspect. To me he was trying to play the 'I know nothing so I can't be scum' card a little too hard (see his later messages as well. In addition, not wanting to vote makes him scummy as well.

Time for me to step in with my first random vote. I suggested to vote for an IC and chose Muerrto. Walnut was the first to step in. He liked my suggestion chose Massive (effectively spreading the votes).
Demon's second post followed (note that he didn't react to any of Litral's and Muerrto's earlier posts.

The way I see it, its better to begin logicly straight away and miss out the random voting stage. So I'll change my point and agree with Snafoo, so I'll point to the person who is neither active or ill.

Of course, the passive person is Massive, so Demon might bandwagon here. This post is obviously scummy, so much so that I still don't buy it. Obvious

fos

here, but I have a feeling that Demon is just a newbish townie. Wouldn't mind lynching him to find out, though.
Note that Demon turned quiet soon thereafter. Did his fellow scum quiet him before he would hang himself? Or did he just loose interest?
Now Massive steps in:

That's disappointing, I really wanted to vote Muerrto, seeing as how he was scum in my last Newbie game! I got my eye on you!

Demonking: Can you speak a little about your vote for me?

Another interesting post. Why can't Massive vote for Muerrto anymore? Because he has 1 vote (from me)? Hmm, I'm not convinced. What if Massive and Muerrto both are scum?
The very next post was by Muerrto:

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.

Please tell me this was a joke...

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Walnut steps in next; there's some confusion about what

knowing

means in the context of a mafia game and the it's Muerrto again.

My vote's good on Demon right now.

You also questioned Litral's random vote for you and OMGUS'ed him. I figured it was a random vote as well but from your further posts and your questioning of his vote I see it wasn't.

Are you simply unfamiliar with the 'random voting stage' that normally occurs? Or were you trying to find an early scapegoat to build a case on?

This was the post that made me suspect Muerrto. What does he mean by "from your further posts and your questioning of his vote"? And why, if he thought that Demon's OMGUS was a random vote, did he jump in so quickly to attack? I found the early scapegoat very funny. Now who was trying to find an early scapegoat to buils a case on? Demon or Muerrto (using Litral's opening)?

Next Archivist tries his best to show that he will not vote on anyone without deep consideration, to which Muerrto replies.

The vote count edit at the top is sweet!

I find it odd that Demonking is voting for massive when he hasn't done anything. Why wouldn't Demon vote for Litral or Muerrto? It seems suspicious...

I hope Demon posts soon, because it looks like he's going to be bandwagoned. I won't vote until I hear more from him.

Little anxious for a bandwagon there...

So you're encouraging Demon to OMGUS vote me or Litral just because we voted him? If he's town he doesn't know if we're scum or not and vice versa so why would voting him automatically make us scummy in his eyes?

Anxious

for

a bandwagon? He seemed to be more anxious

of

one. Muerrto seems to be twisting reality oh so subtly.

Next I vote for Demon, there are some reactions (but no voty-type reactions), Archivist plays the newb spiel once again ("So when someone gets five votes to lynch them, they get killed and the day ends? Fair enough..."), mike is prodded, picks up but still does not post.

Then Massive replies to my Demon vote:

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and vote snafoo. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

As Litral and Walnut pointed out, I did give a reason for voting Demon. So either Massive misread my earlier post or does this on purpose.

Based on the above, my prime suspect is Muerrto. If I had to give a second scum right now, it would be Massive. Having said that, Massive is not very suspect to me - but if he were a scum partner to Muerrto, all pieces of the puzzle would fall into place.

Somewhat suspect:
Demonking - obviously he either is scum or a naive townie. I tend to lean towards the latter but neither would surprise me.
Super Archivist - not voting, trying to play newb (or is he?).
Mike - silence, even after the prod.

[massive]

Litral

: Your post, 55, basically makes my point. He moves his vote from Mike4876 (who he voted for for not having posted yet) to DemonKing, who we know is not actively following the game. My post [45] says exactly that. He's deliberately moving his vote onto people who are not in the game. That's not townie behavior -- townie behavior would ask for those people to be replaced.

Walnut

: You ask if it's common to pile votes on people to see reactions in the early stages of games. This IS common. It can be done for a variety of reasons, as well -- townies want to stimulate discussion, mafia might want to get roleclaims or mislynch. Ultimately it's a null tell. Everyone has a reason to vote because everyone has a victory condition.

snafoo

: Maybe you'd like to rephrase this then?

I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten this time (although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime).

And in response to my Muerrto comment from the beginning of the day: We were in the same Newbie last time around; Muerrto was scum and I nailed him. It was an inside joke more than anything. And while I do believe in random voting, I don't believe in random or OMGUS bandwagoning.

[Muerrto]

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Tell me what about being an IC makes us more or less likely to be scum and I'll vote myself...

Until then

Unvote, Vote: Snafoo

for pushing the 'vote an IC' thing waaay too much.

[Litral]

snafoo, I know that I'm not even on your suspicion list, but I feel that it is necessary for me to explain my post no. 6 in response to Demonking.

Now you're in a newbie game as a newbie. That may mean that you actually did a scum vote first mistake.

Demonking's argument was: you are a newbie suggests you made a mistake. The mistake was to vote first. This is scummy.

Here he uses my "newbie"-ness as an excuse for voting for me. I say that this is Craplogic(tm), by a similar argument:

Craplogic 1. You're in a newbie game as a newbie as well. Does that mean you just did an obvious OMGUS vote? This would mean you're scum.

My (mocking) argument: you are a newbie suggests you made a mistake. The mistake was that you did an OMGUS vote. This is scummy.

To me an OMGUS is indeed scummy, because by definition it implies that no attempt/only weak attempts are made to actually suggest real suspicious points. At best, it's bad town play.

Note that my argument is not the one I stick to. I stick to this argument: Demonking has used Craplogic in order to force reason down an OMGUS vote. If he had just said "OMGUS! vote Litral!" I would've accepted it without further questioning. But the fact that he tried to make it logical is scummy, because it seems that he's deliberately hiding something just to avoid being lynched. (Of course, as you suggest, he may have really believed that his logic was correct.) The second strange thing was that his second post never responded to any of my points, and raised incomprehensible points itself. His third post was a deliberate attempt to shift attention.

And since my vote was random to begin with, I have found no reason to remove it yet, intending to keep the pressure on him (which doesn't seem to have worked).

SA's question was a bit strange:

Sorry for my noobishness, but what does L-2 mean? The wiki doesn't have anything on it...
Also, when does the first day end? Will there be a time limit or something?

I myself find it strange that SA has asked about one of the most basic rules, because he certainly knew a lot of things (such as random voting, lynching, pro-town, IC, etc.), but not enough to know the day ends after a lynch...? Queer. SA, in this game, showing that you are new is actually discouraged (sorry for that), so even though I may not understand some of the game, I try to work it out myself. It's not very newbie-friendly, but... heck.

Until then

Unvote, Vote: Snafoo

for pushing the 'vote an IC' thing waaay too much.

I don't think he's saying that an IC is more likely to be scum. He was saying it'd be more newbie-friendly not to vote off a newbie, and that was as much as he had for the first semi-random vote. He didn't - and I don't - like the "this is a joke" response because it was rather blunt. How is he pushing it way too much?

Might want to explain some of his other suspicions if you have time.

I am particularly intrigued why you have not tried to cast suspicions on people, except those who you were voting against. Seems that a townie would not focus so much on just one target at a time. Maybe you could tell us what you think and help us find the scum instead?

He's deliberately moving his vote onto people who are not in the game. That's not townie behavior -- townie behavior would ask for those people to be replaced.

Really? The town wants to win. Selfish as it may be, the town wants to just find the mafia. Moving votes onto people who are not in the game is a good way to find out if they're mafia, because it'll pull them back into the game... uh... theoretically.

[snafoo]

(Emphasis is mine)

Litral

: Your post, 55, basically makes my point. He moves his vote from Mike4876 (who he voted for for not having posted yet) to DemonKing, who

we know

is not actively following the game. My post [45] says exactly that.

He's deliberately moving his vote onto people who are not in the game.

That's not townie behavior -- townie behavior would ask for those people to be replaced.

Let's see, Demon's last post was on Friday 11 (post #19), my vote for Demonking was on Monday 14. So you're suggesting I knew that Demonking was not in the game less than 72 hours after his last post?
That doesn't add up, even more so when you look at the slowness of this game so far.

snafoo

: Maybe you'd like to rephrase this then?

I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten this time (although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime).

I might if you answer my earlier question first. Here's my question, in case you forgot:

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and vote snafoo. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

That's an interesting way to parafrase my words. Please explain your interpretation.

Funny by the way that both your posts on me say something like ' that's not townie behaviour'.

[snafoo]

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Tell me what about being an IC makes us more or less likely to be scum and I'll vote myself...

Did I ever claim that? Instead of a serious response, is this all you can do? Trying to confuse the point?

Until then

Unvote, Vote: Snafoo

for pushing the 'vote an IC' thing waaay too much.

Now you're giving yourself away. I mentioned the whole thing only

once

. How is that pushing? Pushing

way too much

?

For me, this reply proves my suspicion beyond doubt. Thx for the help.

Unvote

Vote: Muerrto

FoS: Massive

[Muerrto]

I am particularly intrigued why you have not tried to cast suspicions on people, except those who you were voting against. Seems that a townie would not focus so much on just one target at a time. Maybe you could tell us what you think and help us find the scum instead?

Hehe actually it's the exact opposite. Scum don't care who dies as long as it's not them. They try to convince everyone that everyone else is scummy. Causing paranoia is an excellent scum tactic. If everyone's acting scummy for one reason or another, votes will be flying more.

Town very much cares.

I voted Demon because he took the random stage too seriously. His vote was NOT random, he was actually putting up a case on Litral after his first post. Later he reinforced that as I said. Now we thought he was lurking, but since he's not picking up his prod I'm assuming he's simply not playing. But did he drop out because he was nailed as scum on page 1 and he gave up? We'll see what his replacement says.

As for snafoo, he did at one point claim it was newbie-friendly to lynch an IC. But how is that pro-town? Also, statistically the IC's have the least chance to actually be scum so that's not even a good gambit. The fact that he's STILL pursuing that angle and that his top two suspects are me and Massive(the IC's) is beyond scummy. It's bad play.

He's also defending Demon which, since I believe Demon to be scummy, makes him even more so. Since Demon isn't here, I'm voting Snafoo. His arguments have been poor at best.

[Muerrto]

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Tell me what about being an IC makes us more or less likely to be scum and I'll vote myself...

Did I ever claim that? Instead of a serious response, is this all you can do? Trying to confuse the point?

Soo...what's your case to lynch the IC's then? If it's this newbie-friendly crap you in the wrong game boy. This is mafia, not the frickin care bears. I'm not sacking myself so you can play an extra day. I'm here to help the town win and whether you're newbie or not I'll lynch you. That's mafia.

Until then

Unvote, Vote: Snafoo

for pushing the 'vote an IC' thing waaay too much.

Now you're giving yourself away. I mentioned the whole thing only

once

. How is that pushing? Pushing

way too much

?

Once? Hehe, I love quoting it makes me tingle...

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.
There's one player who pretty much asks for getting lynched (given his name). So:

Vote: Muerrto

This seemed like a joke but since you're still pursuing it...

Time for me to step in with my first random vote. I suggested to vote for an IC and chose Muerrto. Walnut was the first to step in. He liked my suggestion chose Massive (effectively spreading the votes).

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Soo...I'm sposed to give an argument why not to lynch an IC when you haven't given an argument on WHY to lynch an IC?

You lynch scum, period. Being an IC doesn't make you more or less likely to be scum so it should never be a factor in deciding.

Sadly, your top two suspects are both IC's and that's no coincidence. And you never miss a chance to mention both of those IC's in your post, even when the post has nothing to do with the other one, see below:

FoS: Massive

Um...you just replied to a post ONLY about me and ended with a vote for me and a thrown in FoS for Massive...

Where exactly did he come up?


So I repeat, give me a reason why being an IC would make one more or less likely to be scum. Give me a reason why being an IC is even a factor when determining if someone is scum.

If you can't do either one and persist in your current line of suspiscion then I have no choice but to keep my vote where it is and hope others follow. You're not simply new and misguided and your argument has no basis except to remove the more experienced players making it easier for you to win.

[snafoo]

Once? Hehe, I love quoting it makes me tingle...

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.
There's one player who pretty much asks for getting lynched (given his name). So:

Vote: Muerrto

This seemed like a joke but since you're still pursuing it...

Now quote the posts where I was pushing the point. Then we'll talk.

If you can't, that proves my point that you are trying to bend the truth.

[massive]

Let's see, Demon's last post was on Friday 11 (post #19), my vote for Demonking was on Monday 14. So you're suggesting I knew that Demonking was not in the game less than 72 hours after his last post? That doesn't add up, even more so when you look at the slowness of this game so far.

There were 24 posts between his last post and your vote, 10 of which mention Demonking by name. That's not slow. There was plenty of discussion. There were plenty of people calling for Demonking to explain himself. He wasn't. He hadn't posted anywhere on site after that last post. So yeah, I think one could have easily guessed that Demonking was not in the game at that point.

That's an interesting way to parafrase my words. Please explain your interpretation.

Your quote: "I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten this time (although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime)."

My interpretation: "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon."

My long-winded interpretation: "In this specific ocassion, I did not change my vote simply to vote for someone who cannot defend himself, be it due to his or her absence from the game, or due to the fact that the evidence stacked against said person is either irrefutable or complete and utter garbage. But I withhold, for the future, my ability to do so, and consider yourself warned that I am willing to do so. I am willing to bandwagon onto trains that have no meaning, I am willing to vote for people who should be replaced, I am willing to pretty much just vote my whim. Remember this in the future when you try to lynch me for my voting habits."

All right, so maybe my interpretation is a little short and a little focused on one area. I like the long version better, actually. =]

[Super Archivist]

Finally! A heated discussion! Even if it is just between two people...

Anyway, about my noobish question... I knew that the day ends when someone is lynched, but I wasn't sure how many votes/real life days were necessary. Now I know that's what the "5 to lynch" thing means.
I've only seen one mafia game before (in a different forum that I lurked at), and it was very different from the games played here. =/

But back to what you guys are talking about... I honestly don't suspect either of you (snafoo and Muerrto) that much at this point, but I think Muerrto's last post was very... defensive. He seemed angry. Now, I don't know if that's because he's mafia, or a townie under fire trying to defend himself, but still... Sarcasm and anger just feels anti-town to me...

[Muerrto]

but I think Muerrto's last post was very... defensive. He seemed angry. Now, I don't know if that's because he's mafia, or a townie under fire trying to defend himself, but still... Sarcasm and anger just feels anti-town to me...

Hm...I don't remember ever even defending myself, could you quote me? I don't defend my actions often so I'd be surprised.

[Muerrto]

EBWOP: After a re-read I'd say the whole post was attacking, as my posts usually are. I don't do things to make me defend myself and therefore don't do it. I don't justify my actions or my posts. Meta me if you want, I'm an agressive player, always on the attack. If you slip, I'll catch it.

[Litral]

Scum don't care who dies as long as it's not them. They try to convince everyone that everyone else is scummy. Causing paranoia is an excellent scum tactic. If everyone's acting scummy for one reason or another, votes will be flying more.

Town very much cares.

Huh. That does not compute for me. A townie never knows who is the real scum; he has only suspicions to act on. There's no way he can be sure. But a scum does know who he points at is or is not scum. If you're townie, I'm certain you wouldn't know who the mafia is, because your reason for voting snafoo is weak (which I will discuss below).

Indeed casting about paranoia is a scummy tactic, but this does not mean townies should not analyze. It's really quite WIFOM, but as far as I know, townies hunt down whomever they suspect, and mafia hunt down whomever the townies suspect, or don't help hunting at all. Townies will definitely help the hunt because they don't know who is mafia or not. You keep seeming to know.

In fact, tunnel vision is also scummy tactic.

Okay, now about the whole "voting off an IC" thing, Muerrto... I see it this way. snafoo voted an IC as the primary basis behind his very first vote, which was basically random. He never relied on the argument again - except he pointed towards your reluctance to accept the vote. He's not pushing the argument any more. I highly suspect he ever argued that you're scum because you're an IC any more. Here is some relevant analysis.

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.
There's one player who pretty much asks for getting lynched (given his name). So:

Vote: Muerrto

The first random vote. The entire thing is full of randomness. True, he stuffed it with a bit of logic, but I like the logic.

Soo...what's your case to lynch the IC's then? If it's this newbie-friendly crap you in the wrong game boy. This is mafia, not the frickin care bears. I'm not sacking myself so you can play an extra day. I'm here to help the town win and whether you're newbie or not I'll lynch you. That's mafia.

This is no longer his case in his suspecting you. If this was his case there were two more people he could've voted. But he voted you. He had other suspicions, which you have completely ignored up to now. Also, again, first random vote, it's better not make the newbies (such as I) feel too bad about being random voted.

Sadly, your top two suspects are both IC's and that's no coincidence. And you never miss a chance to mention both of those IC's in your post, even when the post has nothing to do with the other one, see below:

You're saying his entire campaign is to "vote out the ICs"? That doesn't make sense at all. It's not like there's some obscure role which wins if you vote out the ICs or something.... I think. That's not his purpose, since it just plain makes no sense to be a purpose at all, but you're trying to make it sound as if it is.

It's not a coincidence, I suspect, because most of us newbies haven't even posted much yet. Mike and Demonking are infamously idle and SA is still getting used to the game. There are only two ICs to attack and two newbies to attack, to him. You behaved suspiciously to him due to many reasons stated below.

Soo...I'm sposed to give an argument why not to lynch an IC when you haven't given an argument on WHY to lynch an IC?

You lynch scum, period. Being an IC doesn't make you more or less likely to be scum so it should never be a factor in deciding.

Again, not his main point any more. He only considered the IC factor in post no. 60, not because he's voting for IC, but because his first random vote for IC raised a sarcastic response for you, which seemed like a scummy way to defend yourself.

So I repeat, give me a reason why being an IC would make one more or less likely to be scum. Give me a reason why being an IC is even a factor when determining if someone is scum.

It is not. It is a factor when determining who to vote for in the first random vote. He never pursued the argument again as part of his attack on you.

Actually, what I've said here is what snafoo has said many, many times, and what you, Muerrto, are apparently ignoring.

I do want to know one thing, however, snafoo... why are you pairing Muerrto with massive? I cannot understand your argument. Keep in mind that you said that in post 60, so please use material before post 60 to convince us.

[Litral]

Actually, I notice that snafoo has never again even mentioned his argument. It seems here that he was:

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

But this does not mean he supports an argument indicating Muerrto is scum. That refers to Muerrto's sarcastic response to his vote which was random in nature. It's not even his main argument.

Walnut is the only one to have elaborately defended the "vote an IC" strategy by saying it's more newbie-friendly. And that's because there was nothing to go on. If you think such an argument indicates scum, Muerrto, I think Walnut is more likely to be scum than snafoo.