Mini 586 - Blood Red Mafia - Game Over!

[DarlaBlueEyes]

ah I missed your Post SoW, sorry, That really helps.

and I agree, Mal this is your one chance to clear your name and help me make up my mind.

[Amor]

You either weren't reading carefully or you just made this up. The part I quoted was a reply tajo made to something Darla said, it was not a question for me. Technically, if you want to accuse someone of dodging the question, tajo never replied to that specifically; however since I was asking in order to gauge his reply and his reply to my other part didn't ring any scum alarms with me, I don't really care. Yes I voted based on it and thought it had some value. That is not the same thing as thinking it proves he's scum.

Technically sure, but it was a criticism of your methods, and you answered it while not really dealing with the point. More semantics.

I don't like Macavenger's methods, but on the other hand I really would like to see Malth post more content.

And I've also noticed Darla doing a lot of defending others and echoing others' arguments, she's done it to me as well. This strikes me as scummy, like she's trying to get on townies' good sides (or protecting her scumbuddies... defending a bunch of people might just be a smokescreen for that.)

FoS:DarlaBlueEyes

I wrote this post up before her recent reply, and just noticed it when I went to preview, but my brief response is that she still doesn't present a good reason to be defending everyone. She says Travis is her biggest suspect so far, but has hardly mentioned him. Not convinced.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

I havet been overly suspicious of anyone except Mac, who IMO gave a satisfactory reply.

my top two suspects are Travis and Mal at this point, but I am not gonna vote for someone I don't have a solid case against esp. when theres already a bandwagon forming.

[Travis]

DBE,

Mal is high on my list due to his previous actions as you and others have pointed out but I'm not willing to vote for him at this point because I'm not sure if he is just nervous as a townie or other power role or scum. I know in a previous game I was a cop and got really defensive making me look really scummy and costing me and the town quite a bit. I also over reacted in that game which has made me slow down a lot more in this game.

I think that we have a lot of new or little experienced players in this game so everyone is a bit jumpy.

[Travis]

when theres already a bandwagon forming.

I guess I don't see the bandwagon you are refering to. I know Mal has received some votes and you have gotten some FOS's but no one appears close to a lynch at this point. Plus I don't see anyone trying to sway it specifically toward anyone at this point just stating their opinions which is good.

[Macavenger]

Whats the problem with Malthusis reacting with an OMGUS? Its pretty possible that a townie could have reacted like that because again, the only thing you did was post : "Vote: Malthusis" with no explanation at all. Again, he could be scum, I know that someone will come up with : oh, god he's so defending him, but my point is that his reactions dont prove anything and make wonder abour your reasoning, Macavenger. Seriously.

Why are you so hung up on this bit about it proving anything? Honestly, it's a non-argument because you can say that about anything in mafia. If someone claims cop with a guilty, and you lynch their target and he flips scum, that doesn't prove that the claimer is actually a cop. Obviously I'm using an exaggerated case to make a point here, but the point is just as valid.

The reaction I got is

more likely

to come from scum that town. That's the entire essence of scumtells, things that are more likely to be done by scum than by town. It's a relatively small thing, but this started on page 2. There isn't much to go on on page 2. If we waited for some kind of firm "proof" to make serious accusations, you'd never get out of the random voting stage. You have to jump on anything you see then, even if it is small, or the game will never progress. If you get a good response you drop it and move on to something else. I didn't get a good response.

I bet Malthusis is asking himself the same question.

Good point.

I've explained it a couple times now, I suggest rereading my posts if you don't get it.

Also, your snide comment is a bit misplaced there tajo, since I asked that question not due to any confusion of his motives, but to make sure he was ready and willing to state the correct, pro-town reason for wagoning me there. He did.

So, conclusion, what are your reasons for voting him: reacting or not scumhunting?

If by reacting you mean overreacting, both. The lack of scumhunting is a bigger issue at this stage of the game.

Last time I checked 'Why would you vote for no reason at all?' (#48) was a pretty valid question.It was fairly obvious that I was trying to figure out why you did that.Heck, even after you said what it was I was trying to figure out why.

Sure, and if all you'd done is asked why I voted that way, you would have gotten an immediate explanation, unvote, and you'd probably never have heard about it again. Calling it extremely bad and adding a major FoS over a page 2 vote moving you to L-5 is what got you in trouble.

Technically sure, but it was a criticism of your methods, and you answered it while not really dealing with the point. More semantics.

You still can't accuse me of dodging the question, because there was no question for me to dodge. Further, I wasn't even trying to reply to it - I was asking him a question to see if he demonstrated logical consistency in his reply. The fact that the statement related to my methods actually had very little to do with it.

I basically have to answer you with semantics here, because your argument is based on semantics/misinterpretation.

I don't like Macavenger's methods, but on the other hand I really would like to see Malth post more content.

I definitely think Malthusius isn't looking good right now, between his "Major FoS" on Macavenger and the use of "I did it to create conversation", which always makes me twitch. It's worth noting that in this case he wasn't even being called out for saying it, just disagreed with. At the very least, he's very defensive. FoS: Malthusius

Please explain why you FoS'd Malthusis earlier partly based on the reaction I gained if you don't like my methods.


DBE's recent posts are also starting to ring some alarms for me. I really don't like the way she seems to be trying to undermine SoW's scumhunting efforts. Are they striking too close to home on your scumbuddies or something? There is no such thing as scumhunting too hard. If he starts fabricating cases that's obviously a scum action, but I'm not seeing any real indication of that currently. Unless you have some evidence of that, there's no reason to be suspecting him for it, unless you're trying to undermine his efforts - which no townie should be interested in doing.

I'm also seeing a pretty definite defensive link between DBE and Malthusis. DBE also seems very wishy-washy to me when talking about Malthusis right now; several posts give me a feeling of gaging how strong the wagon is and whether she should jump on it. That's scummy by itself, but a couple specific things I'm seeing look like scumbuddy interactions - something about the way she's asking him to contribute says "shape up or the bus is coming" to me. Could just be the combination of that with the other scummy stuff I'm seeing. In any case,

FoS: DarlaBlueEyes

.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

lol damn talk about a rabbit hole!!

ok......

Yes, I have defended Malth, but like I said, I didn't see anything blaring 100% (or at least 60%) Summy. I figured he overreacted and people saw an opportunity.

Now if the roles were reversed and I were the one being investigated because i made some stupid move early on, I would appreciate someone at least abiding by the 'Innocent until proven guilty' thing, which was all I was trying to do, here with Malth.

However he hasn't given me anything positive to work with since I began defending him. Which makes me believe we should go ahead and lynch or at very least turn the heat on high.

As for the SoW thing as I said in 125, I had misgauged him, and I retracted my accusation/FoS.

I am pretty good with a Malth lynch here...just would like a post or two from others <like caf> before I make the final vote.

Travis, I find less scummy than Malth, but something doesn't set quite right with me about him, I cant put my finger on it, but its still in my mind.

[caf19]

Sorry for not posting - I didn't really have much to say after making my last post. Activity has jumped recently, though, so here are my thoughts on the people being discussed the most:

Malth - seems petulant and unhelpful. Doesn't contribute much or often. His last post (121) seems to rely largely on populartajo's defences of him rather than creating his own. Hasn't questioned any other players apart from Mac. I'm not entirely sold on his lynch yet though as I'd like to get more info out of today -

Malth

, I'd like a list of your suspicions please.

Darla - also very active and eager, has scumhunted a lot. However, she's suspected just about everyone at some point in the game, and most of these suspicions seem to get forgotten about pretty quickly. Posts 46 and 58 she is suspicious of Amor and me, post 84 she moves on to Macavenger after Amor "answered well enough" to her accusations, post 102 she attacks Mac while defending Malth, post 114 she unvotes Mac as she is "pretty pleased with your explanations", post 124 she suspects Malth Shepherd and Travis all in one with a "main FoS" on Travis, by post 131 she is "pretty good with a Malth lynch". I mean scumhunting is good, but this 'revolving door' style Darla has got going isn't great. She could just be going through everyone, trying to form wagon on someone - anyone - until she eventually succeeds. However, this behaviour could feasibly just be misguided town as much as it could be scum. So I'm suspicious of Darla, but not enough to push for her lynch today.

I've got my eye on Travis too. He doesn't say much then pops up to add his support to the biggest wagon of the day. Admittedly he is not overly zealous as he doesn't vote Malth straight away but his posts seem pretty vacant - he mostly uses other people's reasons for suspecting Malth instead of coming up with his own. Also he doesn't follow up on his questions in 111 - they could just be empty attempts to appear pro-town.

Those are my top three. I'm not a fan of the accusations of Mac or Shepherd - they both seem pretty town to me.

By my reckoning Malth is the biggest wagon at 4 votes (L-3) right now (coheed, Mac, Shepherd, Riceball). It's only page six and I don't think we should be heading for a lynch just yet.

I don't want to vote for Malth at this stage but I will

unvote

. My vote was placed ages ago and I don't want to keep it any more. I will try to post more often.

[Travis]

Let's see of my 3 questions in post 111 only one was answered which shows that he has played a couple of games in the past. Guess I didn't find a lot to go on with that information.

[Travis]

So Caf19 and DBE you two seem to think I'm scummy care to ask any questions? I guess your right I saw a lot of good arguments by others that I looked at haven't seen anything new that stands out yet sorry for not being more insightful. At this point DBE is getting on my short list since she appears to be throwing out a lot of accusations to see what sticks to others thus getting the heat off of her.

[populartajo]

Bleh, Im going to sound like Im Mr. Defender, but why are you people disliking Darla? Anyone would like to make a case against her cause the only thing Im seeing is "oh, she's defending her scumbuddies". Why not attacking them, then?
Bleh x2, Ive been expecting a decent post from Malthius since the Macavenger attacks and he hasnt posted it yet, although he just posted one in another game Im with him. This, I agree, doesnt feel like townie eagerness. However, for the record, I still dislike the way Macavenger jumped against him and its been noted for posterior analysis. Thats why Id like that you, Mac, post your reasons for picking specially Malthius. And if you would have picked someone else, who would have been?
Bonus Bleh. Add this to the things I dislike about Macavenger.

I was still being deliberately opaque at this point because I was still testing to see what kind of replies I would get from tajo and Malth. They've both pretty much reacted to everything I wanted to see though, so there's not much point in me continuing to be so obscure at this stage.

Again, it sincerely sounds to me like "Hey, Im scum, I found a perfect opportunity to mislynch someone since he "reacted" badly" Dude, everyone could have reacted badly to "Vote:you".
Bleh x3. Appart from this Mac-Mat situation, I havent found anything decent to comment on. I will do a reread to find more. For now, I still dont like the way Shepperd sometimes scumhunt but its just me I guess. The too townie argument kicks my ass. Also Im very suspicious of the people jumping against Darla and Id like that they make a solid case against her.
Bleh x 4. Apparently there's not many gaborage in this game. Why is that?

[populartajo]

EBWOP
Also Im very suspicious of the people jumping against Darla and Id like that they make a solid case against her, besides caf19.

[Macavenger]

tajo, you are not making a lot of sense here.

Bleh, Im going to sound like Im Mr. Defender, but why are you people disliking Darla? Anyone would like to make a case against her cause the only thing Im seeing is "oh, she's defending her scumbuddies". Why not attacking them, then?
[...]
Also Im very suspicious of the people jumping against Darla and Id like that they make a solid case against her, besides caf19.

Is the "why not attacking them" supposed to mean "Why aren't you attacking her buddies that you think she's defending?" Because if that's the case, I am. She's defending Malth and I'm attacking Malth.

Why is caf19 getting a pass on the case and I'm not? I made at least as much of a case against her as he did. In addition to defending Malth (In looking back toward the start of the game, I noticed she started this pretty strongly right when I made the first accusation against him, incidentally - it was a fair bit more than I thought at first), I also mentioned attempts to undermine SoW and being wishy-washy about jumping on malth's wagon. It's not the best case in the world, but I don't even think she should be lynched today, I'm just noting things I spotted that look suspicious.

Id like that you, Mac, post your reasons for picking specially Malthius. And if you would have picked someone else, who would have been?

I stated this at the top of page 3. I saw him as being overly jumpy at the beginning of the game. To humor you and be more specific, I believe the main thing that caught my eye was post 32 - he responded in a defensive manner to a null comment and gave it a minor FoS. I have no idea who else I might have picked, because that was the first thing I saw that was worth pursuing. At the time it would have been no one. If I'd let that pass, well, I don't know what else might have come up that seemed worthwhile, so I can't say who I'd have targeted.

Bonus Bleh. Add this to the things I dislike about Macavenger.

I was still being deliberately opaque at this point because I was still testing to see what kind of replies I would get from tajo and Malth. They've both pretty much reacted to everything I wanted to see though, so there's not much point in me continuing to be so obscure at this stage.

Again, it sincerely sounds to me like "Hey, Im scum, I found a perfect opportunity to mislynch someone since he "reacted" badly" Dude, everyone could have reacted badly to "Vote:you".

I've already explained multiple times why this is a non-argument. The "anyone could have" argument is bunk, unless you can somehow refute my assertion that it's more likely. In addition, I haven't yet called for Malth to be lynched - pressured yes, but not lynched - so there's no real basis for your mislynch comment.

Honestly, the way you're clinging desperately to this pointless argument is making me a bit suspicious. Repetition is a great propaganda tool. I feel like you could be trying to undermine my argument by keeping doubts about it fresh in everyone's mind even though you can't come up with a logical response to it.

For now, I still dont like the way Shepperd sometimes scumhunt but its just me I guess. The too townie argument kicks my ass.

I feel much the same about this as about the pointless argument above. You admit you have no rational reason to suspect SoW here, but you bring it up anyway because? Just trying to get people not to listen to him by expressing vague suspicion you can't back up, and hoping it catches on?

FoS: populartajo

[DarlaBlueEyes]

I was re-reading as well and noticing how stupid my defending of Mal was, because of the 'major' FoS he placed. The logic behind it was a bit iffy, but I just don't see a strong enough case against him

just

yet.

I dont find anyone to be overtly scummy at this point in the game, although Mal's absence from the thread really puts a damper on my doubts.

FoS Mal. For not coming in here and posting to all these questions.


&&( so I end up looking like an idiot for defending you LOL! )

I accept that it wasn't good to defend him like I did....I just am not a big fan of 'band wagoning' early on because It keeps the focus on one player vs. everyone and makes it hard to find scum. (and at the time most people were concentrating on Mal...thus my reasoning)

[caf19]

Let's see of my 3 questions in post 111 only one was answered which shows that he has played a couple of games in the past. Guess I didn't find a lot to go on with that information.

Yes, that's the point. You asked 3 questions and only one was answered. A pro-town player might follow up by reminding Malth of those questions and making him answer them, but you just let it go until I called you up on it.

I quantified my suspicion of Darla in post 132. I did say that she wouldn't be my top choice for today's lynch, though, and I stand by that currently. Malth's lack of posting is preventing us from proceeding at the moment.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

1)Populartajo attack on Mac & defense of Malthusis

A) Possibly. But it's far more likely to catch scum.

Why? Because eager townies are scum too?

Of course they aren't. Eager townies are more likely to respond with questions, trying to figure out the motives of odd behavior, rather than with near OMGUS levels of suspicion.

Whats the problem with Malthusis reacting with an OMGUS? Its pretty possible that a townie could have reacted like that because again, the only thing you did was post : "Vote: Malthusis" with no explanation at all. Again, he could be scum, I know that someone will come up with : oh, god he's so defending him, but my point is that his reactions dont prove anything and make wonder abour your reasoning, Macavenger. Seriously.

populartajo starts the whole, "anyone can react to your technique".

Macavenger responded:

I gave an FoS because I thought that a vote on someone would sound more scummy right now then a FoS.

Interesting choice of words. Why are you so concerned with what might sound scummy?

About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.

When did I ever say I thought it proved anything? The only real proof in mafia comes with death.

Further, he explained:

I was testing a theory that you seemed a bit jumpy in your responses to stuff flying around in the random voting stage.
You just flunked the test. Badly. And get to keep the vote as a result.

Why did he flunk the test? For being jumpy? What does his reaction prove?

He was jumping way too hard at shadows in the random voting stage, and tossing way more suspicion around than events warranted. A second vote in the random voting stage is virtually meaningless. I agree that my method of putting it on was slightly suspicious; that was intentional. Questioning why I voted in that matter is perfectly legitimate. Even throwing a normal FoS in with it probably would be. Calling it "extremely bad" and throwing a "major FoS" without asking for any clarification first is someone reading a lot more into a page 2 vote than they should be. This is more likely to come from scum, because scum have more to lose from being lynched than town does.

A) Possibly. But it's far more likely to catch scum.

Why? Because eager townies are scum too?

Of course they aren't. Eager townies are more likely to respond with questions, trying to figure out the motives of odd behavior, rather than with near OMGUS levels of suspicion.

B) Reactions are what this game is all about. Scum are more likely to overreact because they have more to lose by dying than a townie does.

No, scum can simply ignore you and a townie can overreact to an acussation because duh, you're accusing of something he or she is not.. My point is that although reactions are helpful, your "test" doesnt prove who's scum or who's not.

Sure, those things could happen. It's just less likely. I never said it proved anything. I saw something on page 2 that I thought was worth looking into. I looked into it, and the reaction I got made me think it was worth looking at more.

I never said I thought Malthusis is clearly scum or called for him to be lynched. I think he's more likely to be scum than town currently, but it's not like I've made a total decision there. My request for more pressure votes was certainly genuine, but this is again aimed at seeing how he reacts. One reaction on page 2 is not worth lynching on. It is worth asking more questions about, though. If it looked like I was calling for him to be lynched, it's because I wanted to see if Malth read that into my statements and reacted to it. He didn't, which is a point in his favor. More on that later, though.

About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.

When did I ever say I thought it proved anything? The only real proof in mafia comes with death.

This is dodging the question. Tajo questioned whether this method would lead us to scum and Mac dodged with semantics. Obviously you thought it was valuable or you wouldn't have voted based on it. Also, the last sentance seems to be setting up for a "Oops, he was town" post later. This makes me more than a little suspicious, but probably not enough to hop on the bandwagon.

You either weren't reading carefully or you just made this up. The part I quoted was a reply tajo made to something Darla said, it was not a question for me. Technically, if you want to accuse someone of dodging the question, tajo never replied to that specifically; however since I was asking in order to gauge his reply and his reply to my other part didn't ring any scum alarms with me, I don't really care. Yes I voted based on it and thought it had some value. That is not the same thing as thinking it proves he's scum.

I was still being deliberately opaque at this point because I was still testing to see what kind of replies I would get from tajo and Malth. They've both pretty much reacted to everything I wanted to see though, so there's not much point in me continuing to be so obscure at this stage.

I'd just like to say that I think it's legitimate to be concerned about looking scummy as a townie. If you're a townie and you act suspiciously and get yourself lynched, then you've hurt your own team. Of course, if you're worrying about it so much that it prevents you from properly scumhunting or expressing your opinions, then it becomes a problem.

I pretty much agree with this. Town certainly doesn't want to look scummy, but that should be a lower priority for them than finding scum. For scum it's their top priority. I asked that question of Malth not because I think townies shouldn't be worried about it, but again because I wanted to see what kind of response I would get. Which leads nicely into my last point here:

I was so worried about looking scummy because at the time (bottom of pg.2) no one else had really done any scummy things. I realize now it might not have been the best move (hey, I'm no expert) but that was the best move in my mind at the time.

I have to agree with SoW and caf19 here. This doesn't look so good both because it appears that not looking scummy is more of a concern than finding scum, which isn't good, and also because you were wrong - votes at that stage of the game would be less suspicious than a "major FoS."

In fact, Malthusis has not actually done any scumhunting in this game, unless you want to count his overblown, OMGUSy accusation of me on page 2. My vote is staying on him now for this reason.

With his clear explanation, you just will not give up. You just keep on keepin' on with this and never really expand to evaluate his replies.

Bonus Bleh. Add this to the things I dislike about Macavenger.

I was still being deliberately opaque at this point because I was still testing to see what kind of replies I would get from tajo and Malth. They've both pretty much reacted to everything I wanted to see though, so there's not much point in me continuing to be so obscure at this stage.

Again, it sincerely sounds to me like "Hey, Im scum, I found a perfect opportunity to mislynch someone since he "reacted" badly" Dude, everyone could have reacted badly to "Vote:you".

I know I would have said, "okay, why do you suspect that I am scum?" I agree that malthusis was way too intimidated when he said:

Vote: Malthusis

This to me is an extremely bad play. Why would you come up to vote for no reason when you haven't talked at all?

Major FoS :Macavenger

You are the second person to even make a deal about Macavenger except for malthusis himself. And then you keep defending this point time after time after time.

Everyone is scummy until proven otherwise. A good method is to apply some pressure and see if they provide any/more scum tells or not.

Ok, what made you decide to pressure me specifically, instead of one of the other 10 players in the game?

I bet Malthusis is asking himself the same question.

Mac was the second to vote for Malthusis, the second vote did not start a wagon, nor put unseemly pressure on Malthusis. This comes off as very defensive on your part.

In fact, Malthusis has not actually done any scumhunting in this game, unless you want to count his overblown, OMGUSy accusation of me on page 2. My vote is staying on him now for this reason.

So, conclusion, what are your reasons for voting him: reacting or not scumhunting?

You just keep defending Malthusis. Look, Mac started suspecting with his overreaction then the lack of scumhunting came up as more evidence to furhter suspicions. Are you serious about questioning which came first. At the time you asked they both were part of his reason.

Bleh x2, Ive been expecting a decent post from Malthius since the Macavenger attacks and he hasnt posted it yet, although he just posted one in another game Im with him. This, I agree, doesnt feel like townie eagerness. However, for the record, I still dislike the way Macavenger jumped against him and its been noted for posterior analysis. Thats why Id like that you, Mac, post your reasons for picking specially Malthius. And if you would have picked someone else, who would have been?

You keep asking for "proof". How do you expect "100% proof"? You have attempted to devirt people from malthusis with this argument. Guess what, suspicion and inquiry is the name of the game. Do you even begin to provide evidence to resolve the suspicions or "prove" that malthusis is town. You wait, with the rest of us, for him to provide even a hint of town in him.

So finally, you acknowledge how bad Malthusis is looking. Now you want to hint at seperating yourself from him so that when he goes down you are not attached. This is the first time you back up from defending him and start seeing that TOWN does not like how he is playing. Are you just wanting to blend with town since no one else sees any value in your attacks on Mac?

2)Populartajo defense of Darla

Is it not possible that malth is a nervous Vanilla? or a Cop or something who it will harm the town to kill?

Defending a scumbuddy?

Is this a serious accusation?

FoS: Rice

Rice, who do you suspect and why?

So, here is the second person that you are defending. Tough she is not under much scrutiny. It may have gone unnoticed if it was only an isolated incident. But, lets see the repetition later on in the game.

Bleh, Im going to sound like Im Mr. Defender, but why are you people disliking Darla? Anyone would like to make a case against her cause the only thing Im seeing is "oh, she's defending her scumbuddies". Why not attacking them, then?

Also Im very suspicious of the people jumping against Darla and Id like that they make a solid case against her.

You have chosen to defend some odd players. But what makes it more suspicious is due to the fact that this seems to be

almost

a trifecta between the three of you.

Though it is vague, malthusis defends Darla too:

What's up with this teaming-up of Rosso and Darla? Unvote; vote: Rosso Carne obv

How do you get this? At worst it means that rosso is a stalker if anything. Darla didn't say anything about rosso.

3)Darla in the

possible

trifecta, mostly for the defense Malthusis.

hmmmm

unvote Amor; Vote: Macavenger

You seem to be very mysterious in this one, and I think Amor answered well enough.

Your responses lend nothing that helpful thus far, a possible scum tell. All you have done is implicate Math, instead of looking at others as well, One liner responses are far from helpful for the town.

Just following the steps of populartajo more than anything.

okay I am rereading and IMO mathusius looks more newbish than scummy, I am still wanting to know why Amor was so defensive of caf.

Is it not possible that malth is a nervous Vanilla? or a Cop or something who it will harm the town to kill? Yea his statements are suspect but just because one is nervous doesn't automatically make them scum in my book. Hell if i had 3 votes I would be nervous too. No one wants to get killed, cos no one wants to lose.

I am wondering why you are so dead set and over zealously hunting SoW. To me that says a SK or a Scum, or it could just an excited townie, I dunno but I think we need to focus more on solid scumtells like Mac's semantics and dodging than we do what some otherwise townie seeming poster's reactions are to being bandwagoned.

again if Mac can convince me otherwise of his scummy/not scummy-ness, and I see more scumtells from Malth, I just might vote for him, but not yet. I am not convinced.

Still defending malthusis.

I am still pretty new to all this, so my approach and my style if you will arent solidified.

I don't know for sure that Mal isn't scum at this time, but based on above posts about what he has done so far he really hasn't done that much. The same could be said of others too, I am only defensive of others because I am not really needing to (or up to now) defend myself, and I just didn't see the scumtells.

Now I will admit Malth is on my radar now, but as said above I am still not convinced. (on anyone)

I still find SoW fishy, Yeah scum hunting is great and benefits us all, it just seems he is too zealous.

So, you do not need to defend yourself at that point. Let me guess, this is what you thought (starting to suspect you may be scum), "why not defend my buddy. Wait, I have been caught defending him, now that makes me look suspicious. How can I back away, but not add to the attack. I should agree with town that malthusis looks suspicious.... .....but that does not help him; almost puts him in greater danger. Okay, I am going to say 'I am still not convinced'."............ Later you say:

lol damn talk about a rabbit hole!!

ok......

Yes, I have defended Malth, but like I said, I didn't see anything blaring 100% (or at least 60%) Summy. I figured he overreacted and people saw an opportunity.

You seem equally in need of 100% proof until you want to "vote" malthusis. This seems to follow suit with populartajo.

Now if the roles were reversed and I were the one being investigated because i made some stupid move early on, I would appreciate someone at least abiding by the 'Innocent until proven guilty' thing, which was all I was trying to do, here with Malth.

You want him to be considered innocent till proven guilty, when if fact you want everyone to be suspected. You have a very strange twisting and turning. Of course, if you were being investigated because you "slipped" you want your team to divert the attention. However, this has started to make you "look" party with him.

However he hasn't given me anything positive to work with since I began defending him. Which makes me believe we should go ahead and lynch or at very least turn the heat on high.

As for the SoW thing as I said in 125, I had misgauged him, and I retracted my accusation/FoS.

I am pretty good with a Malth lynch here...just would like a post or two from others <like caf> before I make the final vote.

Travis, I find less scummy than Malth, but something doesn't set quite right with me about him, I cant put my finger on it, but its still in my mind.

This totally appears that you have given up on malthusis. Even still, you do not want him to be selected. It mostly appears that you are distancing yourself from him because now you see that he has failed the scum alliance. And you keep trying to distance with this next statement, but keep the wrestle to not give up on him.

I was re-reading as well and noticing how stupid my defending of Mal was, because of the 'major' FoS he placed. The logic behind it was a bit iffy, but I just don't see a strong enough case against him

just

yet.

I dont find anyone to be overtly scummy at this point in the game, although Mal's absence from the thread really puts a damper on my doubts.

FoS Mal. For not coming in here and posting to all these questions.

&&( so I end up looking like an idiot for defending you LOL! )

I accept that it wasn't good to defend him like I did....I just am not a big fan of 'band wagoning' early on because It keeps the focus on one player vs. everyone and makes it hard to find scum. (and at the time most people were concentrating on Mal...thus my reasoning)

Now, you need to distance yourself. I am having a hard time being convinced that you are not in alliance with him. You seem to want someone else to make up your mind because you have too much knowledge and do not want to loose a buddy, but he keeps digging himself deeper and deeper.

4)Malthusis applauds Populatajo in defending him

Everyone is scummy until proven otherwise. A good method is to apply some pressure and see if they provide any/more scum tells or not.

Ok, what made you decide to pressure me specifically, instead of one of the other 10 players in the game?

I bet Malthusis is asking himself the same question.

Good point.

A) Possibly. But it's far more likely to catch scum.

Why? Because eager townies are scum too?

Of course they aren't. Eager townies are more likely to respond with questions, trying to figure out the motives of odd behavior, rather than with near OMGUS levels of suspicion.

Last time I checked 'Why would you vote for no reason at all?' (#48) was a pretty valid question.It was fairly obvious that I was trying to figure out why you did that.Heck, even after you said what it was I was trying to figure out why.

Malthusis can only grab populartajo's defense. Apparently he does not have his own.

Note to Malthusis:

It is overly obvious that you were trying to figure out why he voted you. Guess what, he is not the only one that has voted you now; and not the only one that sees you as suspicious. If you cannot figure out why he sees you as being suspicious, maybe you should try reading what everyone else has said too. Answer our concerns. You keep looking worse with every statement you make.

I would ask to prod some people right now, but it's not going to help considering the fact that the mod is gone till Friday

Thanks for saying this. WHERE THE HECK ARE YOU! Have you given up on the game? Have you been caught and have nothing else to say.

FoS: populartajo & FoS: Darla.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

wow, that is some heavy handed accusation there SoW.

Its a good case, worded well and very cohesive. Only one problem, I am not scum.

I can see a Pop/Mal alliance sure, why Pop is defending me I do not know, maybe he likes that I was defending his scum buddy (mal) and wants to keep me around longer than those who are leading the crusade against mal.

I agree however, Mal needs to post. The fact he is avoiding all this is a very telling thing. Under the guise that 'The mod is Gone' thats not satisfactory, Mal I am afraid all hope I had in you or at least my doubts that you weren't scum are fading rapidly.

My only question is this, (to the more experienced players as I am still new and haven't completed a full game to this point) don't scum normally avoid lurking? Not defending Mal here, I am just confused by his actions, he is called out, defended by one or more players (Pop, Me) and he still lurks...that just seems kinda weird to me...,

I don't know....

but I don't see why My wanting to be sure before I vote bothers you SoW? I don't want to lynch someone and them end up being innocent...thats why I wait till I am sure, but as it stands my prime suspect IS mal.

[populartajo]

The reaction I got is more likely to come from scum that town. That's the entire essence of scumtells, things that are more likely to be done by scum than by town. It's a relatively small thing, but this started on page 2. There isn't much to go on on page 2.

Is it too hard to understand my point? I know that there are things that are more likely done by scum but even you are realizing that there isnt much to go on page 2. I understand why you picked Malthius, but why didnt you explain yourself when you voted for him? Why dont people here understand that its a decent reaction to suspect and to Major FOS someone that only posts "vote : Malthius"? What does a reaction prove?
Thats my point.
It would have been helpful to link you to my first game in this place. Newbie 499. It would help you to understand where Im coming from and why Im so against this kind of playstyle. IH, scum in this game, was trying to set a trap, also adding that people who reacted badly enough to his trap were almost certainly scum. I argued hard against him with the same point. A reaction could prove anything but against newbies (this also seems to be the case here) we should be careful enough, since we dont know if we could catch dumb townies, almost making it a null tell.

Why is caf19 getting a pass on the case and I'm not?

Im talking about some other players, Mac. They know who they are and Im still waiting. The fact that I didnt include you is most due to the fact that I simply dont like you. Caf made a good post about her, BTW, hence the free pass.

I feel much the same about this as about the pointless argument above. You admit you have no rational reason to suspect SoW here, but you bring it up anyway because?

Because its definetely better to be quiet about my suspicions or things I dont like, Yeah sure.
Answering to Shepherd's post when I have the time to reread that.
Just a small question, why exactly are you suspecting me, Shepherd?
And just a bonus paragraph for you, friend. Im not defending anyone. Everyone is suspicious to me. My point is that Malthius and Darla are relative newbies, Im not saying they're 100% townies or 100% scum, but they are so easy to be attacked and Im not liking some attacks, especially against Darla. Thats all. If you read my posts, I never said Malthius or Darla were confirmed townies for this. To be honest, it bothers me that Malthius is not well seen by almost all the town, yet he posts in another games and his only defense was quoting my ideas.
What I dont like is that you're stretching this a little too much for my taste. I feel the same about your eager scumhunting but its just a gut feeling I cant keep in my mind.

[goborage]

@ SoW: Just curious, what do you think of caf/coheed right now?

@ DBE: After reading SoW's giant post I felt kinda let down by your defense.

Anyways if I had to vote for someone right now it would malth. I agree that he is suspicious and his lack of posting is really anti-town, particularly when people are directly addressing him. I'm going to hold off voting though until he posts.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

Let me state one clarification. I respect everyone who is withholding their vote from Malthusis until he posts. Personally, I would rather have him replaced than lynched for not talking. If the Mod was here, I am sure we would all be pleading for a PROD. So, I agree that we should all wait until he posts or is replaced. If anyone new decides to vote before he posts and responds, then I will remove my vote until we hear from him. But, as long as everyone is holding, then I will keep my vote. This does not define what happens to my vote when and if he responds. That decision will entirely be contingent on him and how he responds.

As for Darla and populartajo, I will respond to your comments later. I do not have time to respond at this moment. Plus, I want to get more feedback from all of town on what I have indicated in my post. My largest desire is to have Malthusis speak. I would be thrilled if he could help us determine his alliance. If he is town, he sure is really not helping us by getting us all wound up.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

goborage, I will get back with you on that too when I get the time to reread and type more.

***To everyone:

if my post was too long, I apologize. I really did not see any easy way to consolidate the substance of what I saw. Thanks for your patience with reading it.

***

[Macavenger]

Is it too hard to understand my point? I know that there are things that are more likely done by scum but even you are realizing that there isnt much to go on page 2.

That's why you go on things that are minor at the time, and see if they develop into something major. This did.

I understand why you picked Malthius, but why didnt you explain yourself when you voted for him? Why dont people here understand that its a decent reaction to suspect and to Major FOS someone that only posts "vote : Malthius"? What does a reaction prove?

Explaining why I voted him at the time would have prevented me from getting an honest response. If I say "Vote Malthusis for being jumpy" of course he's not going to jump in his response to me. Then I have no information to go on, and the game may not go anywhere. My way, I get information, one way or the other.

A Major FoS is way the hell out of place on Page 2. People were still random voting at the time. Reacting with a question and some suspicion is ok. A major FoS is just weird. The only reason I can even imagine using that so early would be if someone put someone on L-1 early for no good reason, and even then usually you'd just vote them instead.

It would have been helpful to link you to my first game in this place. Newbie 499. It would help you to understand where Im coming from and why Im so against this kind of playstyle. IH, scum in this game, was trying to set a trap, also adding that people who reacted badly enough to his trap were almost certainly scum. I argued hard against him with the same point. A reaction could prove anything but against newbies (this also seems to be the case here) we should be careful enough, since we dont know if we could catch dumb townies, almost making it a null tell.

I read over the first few pages of 499 (IH replaced out pretty early). I really don't see how it's similar. If you're referring to him calling you out for overreacting early on, well guess what, you overreacted, he didn't do anything to induce that reaction, and another town member called you on it too. If you're referring to the "I saw a huge scumtell" schtick, I still don't see how that's related. That's a totally open ended statement that could get anyone to chew on it, and the results of it would be very open to interpretation. Mine is a binary test of a certain player I saw something from, with relatively clearly defined results. I also don't see anywhere in that game where you argued against IH in anything remotely resembling the manner you're doing here.

Do you agree or disagree that Malthusis' actions independent of my test have been scummy?

Im talking about some other players, Mac. They know who they are and Im still waiting. The fact that I didnt include you is most due to the fact that I simply dont like you. Caf made a good post about her, BTW, hence the free pass.

Giving caf a pass was reasonable. Thanks for admitting to using an arbitrary double standard in my case.

Because its definetely better to be quiet about my suspicions or things I dont like, Yeah sure.

If you have something rational to back them up, by all means let us know. That's what I did with DBE. Making baseless claims doesn't help the town, though. If you have nothing specific, it looks like you're trying to push a negative impression over a helpful player to undermine his efforts, which can only help scum.

Im not defending anyone.

Everyone is suspicious to me.

(Italics added)
Why do you feel the need to claim you aren't defending Darla and Malthusis when you very blatantly are?

[DarlaBlueEyes]

Goborage ==

I am sorry If i let you down, but its not a simple task to follow up a post like that.

I am new to this and havent gotten down the whole quoting multiple people thing, hence why my posts rarely have them, and I am petty oblivous LOL

I read posts, then someone (in this case) SoW show up and quote them and show whats suspicious and its like ashgajdsomg. I don't see it D:

I feel lame here and hope my ignorance doesn't get me lynched.

I agree about what said above,

Prod: Mal

(CES is back Friday right? that gived Mal at least a day to post, because his silence is extremely unsettling.)

[Riceballtail]

@Greasy & Coheed

Who do you think is scum and why? You two have been silent this page. (3 RL days)

[CoheedCambria09]

I still think Mal. is the scummiest player, I've just been waiting and waiting to see what he has to say for himself, if that answers your question