Mini 586 - Blood Red Mafia - Game Over!

[Macavenger]

goborage you seem very quiet in this game right now, especially compared to your activity in your other games. Why don't you tell us what you think of each player here right now?

[goborage]

Bah leave me a lone. Do you seriously meta everyone for activity or am I special? I signed up for too many games and I like some more than others.

But as per request:

neutral-leaning scummy: malth
neutral: everyone else

[Macavenger]

Bah leave me a lone. Do you seriously meta everyone for activity or am I special? I signed up for too many games and I like some more than others.

I meta anyone that seems to be lurkish for activity, you're not special in that respect.

Your answer to my question is somewhat underwhelming.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Votecount
With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch!

malthusis (4) - CoheedCambria09, Macavenger, Shepherd_of_Wolves, Riceballtail

CoheedCambria09 (2) - goborage, malthusis
Macavenger (1) - populartajo

Not voting: Greasy Spot, Amor, DarlaBlueEyes, Travis, caf19

Prods will be going out ASAP

[caf19]

Welcome back CES!

Hopefully now that prods are going out, we might get something from Malth.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Greasy Spot, malthusis and Amor have been prodded.

[Amor]

Ouch, prodded. I thought I had posted more recently than that.

I don't have time to make a real post now, but I'll definitely do so tonight.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

Thanks for the prods and Welcome back CES!

Here's hoping they will show up (aside from amor :p)

[Riceballtail]

Mal has seriously delayed this game. It's a bit irritating. At this point I'd hammer him just for holding us up, despite what others think. I'm just getting a bit irritated with this lack of action. I'd suggest something else, but everyone is so focused on Mal that there's not a lot of point because it will get passed over.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

Well, I definitely say that Malthusis has held up the game. And when the silent players are asked what they think they differ to Malthusis. Everyone has made their case. Seriously, we need to have some discussion.

[Amor]

Bah leave me a lone. Do you seriously meta everyone for activity or am I special? I signed up for too many games and I like some more than others.

But as per request:

neutral-leaning scummy: malth
neutral: everyone else

Wow, this is a seriously lazy reply.

The thing that I find suspicious about Darla is not that she's aligned with Malth and therefore is Malth's scumbuddy, but that it seems like most of her actions in this game are defending. She's defended, or at least praised, malthusis, myself and Mac, the last two after voting and unvoting shortly afterwards. She defends more than she attacks, and when she attacks it's weak. Defending is pretty much always good for scum:

1) If the player they're defending is town and that player gets lynched, it makes the defendee look better for defending the.
2) If the player they're defending is town and the defender gets lynched, it makes the defendee look scummy when they're actually town.
3)If the player they're defending is scum, it supports their scum buddy (although it would cause problems if either of them were to be lynched)

Also, defending many people could be used to make it look less suspicious when they do defend their partner. So I think defending more than attacking is scummy. Still, I'm not sure that this alone is enough to vote Darla. I'm kind of having trouble getting a good handle on this game, to be honest.

[goborage]

Geez talk about peer-pressure.

Wolves: A lot of finger-pointing but not that much commitment. Hasn't answered my question.

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

DBE: Defends others. A lot. But as Amor has pointed out, it is spread across town. Null-tell imo.

Mac: Springs a "trap" on his first vote. Not sure I buy it.

Amor: Hypocrite. Calls me a lazy poster after being prodded.

Malth: If I'm a lazy poster than he must be a hibernating one.

I seriously don't have anything to say about the others. It was a strain just to write this.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

The thing that I find suspicious about Darla is not that she's aligned with Malth and therefore is Malth's scumbuddy, but that it seems like most of her actions in this game are defending. She's defended, or at least praised, malthusis, myself and Mac, the last two after voting and unvoting shortly afterwards. She defends more than she attacks, and when she attacks it's weak. Defending is pretty much always good for scum:

1) If the player they're defending is town and that player gets lynched, it makes the defendee look better for defending the.
2) If the player they're defending is town and the defender gets lynched, it makes the defendee look scummy when they're actually town.
3)If the player they're defending is scum, it supports their scum buddy (although it would cause problems if either of them were to be lynched)

Also, defending many people could be used to make it look less suspicious when they do defend their partner. So I think defending more than attacking is scummy. Still, I'm not sure that this alone is enough to vote Darla. I'm kind of having trouble getting a good handle on this game, to be honest.

Honestly with the exception of Mal, I haven't seen a lot of Scumtells from anyone. Nothing solid at least, an when I see cases try to form I defend them to see if they hold up. If they do, then I move on If not, I will keep at it.

Thats how I tick.. yeah its weird.. well I am weird.

Thats a lot of why I have been 'spread across the town'


With a 'Prosecution' if you will you need a 'defense' as well in order to get a coherent story, If you say something Looks scummy, My defense is more likely to get you to 'prove' it to me or see that its not as solid as you thought.

Its not that I don't suspect these people.. its more of a reverse psychology thing. Get the answer you want from a backwards route.


anyways I am pretty much set on a Mal lynch, I would like one more post or a replacement's post before I make a vote or Hammer.

[caf19]

It's not Darla's willingness to defend that gets to me, it's how easily she changes opinion. Several times already she's said someone looked really scummy, but all it took was one long post from them for her to abandon her suspicion and move on to someone else. It happened with Amor, it happened with Macavenger and again with Shepherd. I wonder whether it'll happen with Malth (although it doesn't look all that likely, maybe because most other people want him lynched too...).

Honestly with the exception of Mal, I haven't seen a lot of Scumtells from anyone.

That's strange. Here are some quotes from earlier today:

I am still really suspicious of Caf/Amor

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.

I find him suspicious personally, My vote would stand pressure or not.

You're saying you didn't find scumtells from Amor or Mac despite repeatedly expressing suspicion of them and voting for them?

FoS Darla

. Not voting yet as Darla also has redeeming features (eagerness, activity, a possible "noob town" excuse) and also because Malth is still right up there. However, her defence of herself seems to be worryingly selective. As well as defending people, she's also done quite a bit of attacking, but she seems to forget all about that once other people start to characterise her as a 'defender'. She seems to defect to others' opinions an awful lot.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

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.

This could be true. Or, it could be a lie.

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.

As stated after this post, I can repsect the hold off up to this point (patiently waiting for malthusis). But, it is the unwilling attitude to follow through with a vote after the strong statement of readiness to lynch that gets under my skin. You sure put out the idea that you do not know this; you do not know that. I think you are playing hard on the newbie card like it will be the "pass all". I can understand it from time to time, but every accusation you get, what happens, you pull out the newbie card and flash it around like it proves your innocence. This is a second thing that just itches at me.

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

Right now, they have really backed off from any interaction with each other. That could mean too many things. But, the whole connection was not strong enough to really know if they are backing off to create an image of distance. To be certain, Coheed has only offered "one-liners". He has never helped town by stating reasons with much detail. Since malthusis has went silent, he has only deferred to waiting for a post. He demands answers from Mac but never really follows up with further questioning, or dissects the statements of either Mac or malth. I get the feeling that he is hiding under

On the other hand Caf actually has some more substance to his statements. He seems to follow up better than Coheed. But, they have not really ever come out on each other. Any connection is too transparent to through light on.

Finally, to populartajo: I can understand the dislike behind the trap. But, it is the explanations that come after the trap. Plus, I do not think that it is a huge deal for a player to say "vote: player" that early in the game. I did not see it as being too terrible. The fact that he acknowledges that it was a trap and explains every detail behind his thinking seems to resolve all the questions you press on him. Yet, no response or explanation he offers you gets through to you.

RL: I am working long days that is why my posts have been vague and have not addressed the questions more directly.

[populartajo]

Shepherd, why do you exactly suspect me?

[populartajo]

A Major FoS is way the hell out of place on Page 2

Why is a Major FoS hell out of place on Page 2 and not a Vote:Malthius? Macavenger, we are never going to stop arguing. I simply dont buy your trap excuse, independant of your or Malthius allignement. I hope he is scum, he has fcked up this town with his lurking, pretty everyone are suspecting him or Darla, it has prevented us for truly scumhunting. Just tell me one more thing, what would happen if we lynch him and he comes up town?

If you're referring to the "I saw a huge scumtell" schtick, I still don't see how that's related.

It was a trap. IH even said it was a trap. It's totally related with the only exception that no one felt in it. Later he explained that people reacting bad enough were possibly scum. My point is that he's using the same weak argument (null reactions) as a way to catch scum. Some things I posted about him.

IH : ..... I also consider the "I found a big scumtell" tactic a little bit strange because it is just trying to confuse town. Maybe, looking for someone inexperienced, a possible mistake and the start of a "distractive" bandwagon.

What does it differentiate from IC scum trying to get suspicious reactions (especially from newbie townies) so that he can develop his strategy from them?

He was finally scum. Now, do you understand me?

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

Sadly I agree.

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.

You make a good point here. But don't you think Shepherd's trifecta is way too much?

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

Becuase Im not. My siding with Malthius was totally due to the fact of my disliking of your trap. For Darla, I dont like the way some people are jumping in her bandwagon becuase I sincerely think she's a newbie having a hard time defending herself.

[goborage]

Hey Mac, since I made a list how about you show us yours?

BTW the FoSs on DBE are not well-thought out. If DBE is indeed protecting her scum partners then it means there are 4 scum in this game (assuming I'm counting right). That would be a bit much for 12 player game don't you think?

[Amor]

Amor: Hypocrite. Calls me a lazy poster after being prodded.

Yeah, I've been busy lately, but when I do post I at least try to contribute. "I have no opinions, other than that the top-voted person is slightly scummier than the rest" is not helpful at all.

It's starting to look like Malth's not posting is actual flaking and not lurking, so he will probably be getting replaced soon. I think we should wait for his replacement before lynching him. At the same time, as a reminder the deadline for this day is the 9th, so we should start moving towards a lynch. So, to put my money where my mouth is, I'll go after my other subject and

Vote: DarlaBlueEyes

[Riceballtail]

1)

MOD:

While the deadline is May 9th, what time does it officially end? Time zone included would be a plus.

2) I still advocate a Malth lynch today. Based on what we get out of his death will help to fill my suspicion tables.

3) Darla is still showing high on my radar, but I'm more concerned with finding the likely third member of the team.

[Macavenger]

Why is a Major FoS hell out of place on Page 2 and not a Vote:Malthius?

Because votes fly freely in the first couple pages for reasons that are specious at best. In general they mean almost nothing. You should be expecting to get a random vote or two that early. There were a few other votes on page 2 with no game relevant reason this game. Sure, I didn't accompany mine with a joke reason, and I expected him to ask about that. Asking about it is fine. A Major FoS, however, is something you don't see on page 2, and implies very serious suspicions about a person.

Several other people posted between my vote and Malthusis' reply to it. None of them found it worth commenting on at the time. It's really not that out of place.

If you read 100 games, you'd probably find several hundred page 2 votes, probably even quite a few that didn't have any reasoning at all attached. I bet you'd only find 1 or 2 Major FoS's.

Macavenger, we are never going to stop arguing. I simply dont buy your trap excuse, independant of your or Malthius allignement.

No, we will pretty soon, because I'm going to quit bothering to reply pretty soon unless you bring up some new arguments that I haven't already snapped in half.

Just tell me one more thing, what would happen if we lynch him and he comes up town?

Sucks for town that we got a townie who decided to act suspicious and then give up.

It's not going to cause me to think my method is invalid, if that's what you're asking. Malth has done too much other scummy stuff this game to make me give up on it.

It was a trap. IH even said it was a trap. It's totally related with the only exception that no one felt in it. Later he explained that people reacting bad enough were possibly scum. My point is that he's using the same weak argument (null reactions) as a way to catch scum.

It's not similar at all. His trap was completely open ended, and made in a way he could do almost anything with it. He hadn't seen anything, he wasn't targeting anyone, he just wanted someone to call scummy. The way he talks about his trap, he could have called almost any reaction at all to it scummy. "Gee I wonder what that big scumtell he's talking about was?" "Oh, guilty conscience there, obvscum." Anyone could mention him saying that in some kind of random analysis or something, and he had it setup so he could call almost any reaction to it scummy.

Compare with what I did. I saw a specific, possibly scummy reaction from Malthusis (jumping at shadows in random stage). I take a normal action in that stage of the game (vote) and target him with it in a slightly unusual way. This gives him a chance to either a) jump hard and confirm my suspicions, or b) not overreact and tell me I was just imagining things. This is a very specific, binary test of one player, trying to see if something I already think I see has merit or not. That's totally different than throwing out a statement that many people will be curious about and being able to label almost any reaction to it scummy. Honestly, I think "test" is a far better term for what I did there than "trap," although I concede the difference is probably mostly aesthetic.

IH : ..... I also consider the "I found a big scumtell" tactic a little bit strange because it is just trying to confuse town. Maybe, looking for someone inexperienced, a possible mistake and the start of a "distractive" bandwagon.

What does it differentiate from IC scum trying to get suspicious reactions (especially from newbie townies) so that he can develop his strategy from them?

Ok, I didn't read it quite carefully enough to find those. I still find that nowhere near the vehemence with which you are arguing against me, though.

You make a good point here. But don't you think Shepherd's trifecta is way too much?

No. You, DBE, and Malth have tangible connections to each other. DBE and Malth are both scummy independent of those connections. It's not at all unreasonable for this stage of the game. It probably isn't entirely correct - few cases constructed this early ever are - but I agree that it's the best we have to go on currently, and has no clear flaws.

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

Becuase Im not. My siding with Malthius was totally due to the fact of my disliking of your trap. For Darla, I dont like the way some people are jumping in her bandwagon becuase I sincerely think she's a newbie having a hard time defending herself.

So, saying we shouldn't be attacking certain people, or that certain attacks on them are bad, is different from defending them how? You kind of have a point with Malth, as that is a case of one specific thing directed at him your'e attacking. With Darla though, I mean you say right there you think she's a newbie having a hard time defending herself, so you're... helping her defend herself. You're telling people we're not attacking her for good reasons and trying to get us to stop. That's defending.

Hey Mac, since I made a list how about you show us yours?

Sure.

• Amor: mildly suspicious of his weird semantics argument on me, but he's not trying to push it anymore it seems. Most actions seem vaguely townish. Pretty neutral read.
  
• Riceballtail: Would like to see a bit more posting, but not seeing anything scummy. Neutral, leaning town.
  
• caf19: Looks to be honest scumhunting. Probable town.
  
• Coheed: Lurkish. Not much to go on. Neutral.
  
• DBE: Defends lots of people, vote hops quite a bit, opinion seems to shift with the popular wind, very wishy washy and noncommittal about the Malthusis wagon. Probable scum.
  
• Greasy Spot: Lurker. Very little to go on. Said LA until 30th, but that was what 4 days ago? Where did you go?
  
• Malthusis: I've talked about him a lot, probable scum.
  
• populartajo: Defensive of Malth/DBE, crazy repetition of poor arguments against my scumhunting techinque, also baseless statements about SoW, could be trying to push a false impression over the town on scumhunters striking too close to home. Denial of defensiveness worrisome. Possible scum, but I could see him being a misguided townie.
  
• SoW: Huge amount of effort put into scumhunting, nothing so far to suggest any of it is less than honest. Probable town.
  
• Travis: Lurker. Not much to go on, but my gut says probably a bored townie. Definitely worth watching and pressuring though.
  
• goborage: Clearly not putting much effort in. Semi-lurker. Uncooperative and antagonistic. Defending DBE. Definitely needs to be paying more attention to this game. Possible scum.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

meeps

alright, well what I meant before and didn't d a good job of saying apparently, is that when I defend i don't necessarily believe the person isn't scummy, most of the time I am curious about the attack, I just found and *think* that having one person defending you can get you guard down low enough to slip *OR* It can completely disprove the case against you. Its unorthodox, yeah, its weird, yea, maybe its even illogical.. it s just how I naturally approach it.

If that makes me seem scummy well then.. maybe I Ought to reconsider my tactics.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

EBWOP:

I also mix in random attacks to gauge reactions as well, although I find that I have trouble getting together a solid attack so I tend to shy away from making big accusations vs things i noticed...I am really bad at this stuff. D:

anyways are there any questions you guys want me to answer?

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

OG Smokedank will be replacing malthusis, effective immediately. I'm still busy replacing Greasy Spot.

Also, deadline will be approx. 6 PM GMT, 9th.

[populartajo]

Oh no.
Responding later.