Mini 586 - Blood Red Mafia - Game Over!

[goborage]

Hmm if I'm added into the DBE defense thing then there is a five-man scum team.

I think we need to agree on when defending another player is a reasonable and pro-town thing to do.

IMO:

Acceptable protown defending: Make sure the accused posts first. Don't defend someone else unless they are drawing fire (votes or a lot of FoSs)

Not-so-protwon defending would be the opposite. Defending the accused before they themselves post or jumping to someone's aid for no apparent reason.

Anyways I don't think my defending of DBE is scummy. She is drawing a lot of fire for what I believe to be poor reasons.

I also don't think DBE is scummy. Yes she falls into my "Not-so-protown" definition, but she turns it into a null-tell by defending so many people. She has also since agreed not to defend people so haphazardly. I think the newbie defence works here as well.

In summary, defending another player is not necessarily scummy behaviour. I think townies defend their ilk just as much as scum do (maybe even more so as scum may try to avoid making connections to each other).

An addendum to my list:

populartajo: seems very earnest in his attack on Mac

Riceballtail: parrot-talk up the ying-yang.

[caf19]

Thanks for replacing, Smokedank. What do you think about your predecessor, and who are your top suspects so far?

Travis is lurking again btw. Travis, you're never going to stop me being suspicious of you if you don't post more.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

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?

Well, I answered your question that you took time to ask twice. What did you learn from my answer. What was the point to the question?

What do you mean, that I have "not that much commitment"? What shows lack of commitment to you. I vote were my main points are on Malthusis. He is the most scum player of all. What do you expect in commitment? If lack of commitment bothers you, then you should be all up on Darla's case. She changes her mind more than any other player on where her vote and suspicions are committed.

Shepherd, why do you exactly suspect me?

You say in this next quote that you know that reactions can be helpful and acknowledge that it

does not prove 100%

.

Populartajo, why is it you dont think reactions can be used to find scum? I dont think that they should be the sole reasoning for scum accusations, but I do think they can be helpful.

I already said that there's no way Macavenger could be 100% sure that his "test" could catch scum, since eager townie can also answer that provocation. About reactions, it seems to me that everyone can react differently, they're helpful, I know, but they dont prove anything.
I didnt like his last response, BTW.

Vote : Macavenger.

Also, there's something that bothers me about Shepherd, he feels like he's hunting too much for my taste. Idk, yet.
And can anyone tell me whats the problem with caf?

You suggest that they are helpful. So, if they do not prove 100%, do you suppose they are "more likely" to indicate scum. If they are not "more likely" to come from scum, then how do you seem them as helpful?

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

Why? Because eager townies are scum too?

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.

How are reactions helpful? Again, he did not claim to

prove

anything by the statement. He implied that the reaction was "more likely" to come from scum.

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?

What about this question. Mac said, he is voting for the initial overreaction and then further the next reason comes from his lack of scum hunting. What is the point to your question. You seem to overlook the growing case on malthusis and keep repeating one single point that he address time after time. You seem like you are trying too hard to get someone else to agree with you by returning to this topic endlessly.

The thing next that you say is part of the

possible

trifecta argument that I proposed earlier. You start the whole disregard for the attack on Darla by defending both Darla and Malthusis (by defending the defense of malthusis made by Darla). You seem to want to make their connection together seem like it is not a real sign. This comes on top of defending malthusis the whole game prior. Here is the quote.

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?

Why does it bother you that Rice saw that connection?

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?

So, you further keep defending your second pick to defend. What is the question at the end of this quote. malthusis is already under attack. That was her suspected scum buddy. You joined the suspected group by repeated defending malthusis and now defending her, his other defender. The three of you seem to be on the same page.

It almost seems like scum would try to avoid this. So, maybe one of the three of you are innocent. Maybe you like to have her helping the defense on malthusis so that it does not make you look alone. I am still trying to piece the meaning together.

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".

As stated before, started to distance yourself from malthusis only after no one else agreed with you. You still work hard at this whole point that has been resolved.

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?

The Darla connection continues. So, you mention gaborage; why not Travis, why not Coheed? These people are equally annoyingly silent at that phase of the game. Plus, they both have super pointless things to add.

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.

I am glad to ruffle some feathers. If I did not get under some players skin, then I would not be doing my job. It just happens to be getting under you skin. You are defending players. Your denial does not make that less than true. What is up with this 100% stuff. Only one group has 100% knowledge of who is on what side of town. How can you expect us to present 100% proof. No, you did not prove that they are 100% scum or 100% town. Why are you so concerned with malthusis bad appearance. Is there some reason that you do not want him lynched? Maybe you taste buds are tainted with blood. Maybe, I am getting close to you. Darla, may possible be innocent, I know she does seem very new. But, I do not see that as the trump all. Malthusis is beyond annoying for quiting the game. I feel bad for his replacement. But, you do not sit well with me as I have outlined in this post.

Tell me, other than Darla being new at this, why else do you defend her? What has she said to give you confidence in her being pro town? I do not like you 100% standard that you expect Mac to answer too. What makes her likely to be town by way of analyzing her posts? I am not 100% sure of any player. But, you seem to have more knowledge than the rest of us, why don't you give some to us.

[goborage]

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?

Well, I answered your question that you took time to ask twice. What did you learn from my answer. What was the point to the question?

What do you mean, that I have "not that much commitment"? What shows lack of commitment to you. I vote were my main points are on Malthusis. He is the most scum player of all. What do you expect in commitment? If lack of commitment bothers you, then you should be all up on Darla's case. She changes her mind more than any other player on where her vote and suspicions are committed.

I was just pointing out that you're not particularly focused in your scumhunting. You drift from one person to another. An example of this would be the caf/coheed connection which you spent some time developing but have not talked of since.

But it's just an observation, I don't know if it's indicative of alignment or not.

[OG Smokedank]

hey ok gimme a chance to read this thread, whattup all

[DarlaBlueEyes]

welcom Smoke....sorry its not a better time for you to replace in. Malth didn't leave you in such a hot position. When you read up I'd like to get your thoughts on stuff so far, who you suspect and such.

[Amor]

Welcome, Smoke!

Of course not everyone Darla defends is scum, even if she does turn out to be scum. I explained why scum would also defend townies in my last post. I also don't like the "defense lawyer" idea, while it can help refine an attack it will also ward off legitimate cases and (in this case) deflect attention onto the defender. People are responsible for defending themselves in this game. Their responses can also reveal more about their alignment, and someone else defending them can prevent that.

A lot of people seem to be lurking or at least staying in the background -- Travis, Coheed, caf, and Greasy Spot all fit this description at the moment. This worries me a little.

[caf19]

A lot of people seem to be lurking or at least staying in the background -- Travis, Coheed, caf, and Greasy Spot all fit this description at the moment. This worries me a little.

I think I've made my opinions fairly clear, I'm just waiting for Smokedank to weigh in.

As for the others... I think Greasy Spot is getting replaced but the other two should be chased up. Travis definitely needs to contribute more (it's been a week since he posted) and Coheed's contribution has been pretty low all game (his posts are pretty much exclusively one-liners).

We only have 3 days left - do we want to ask for that three-day extension today? Personally, I think we should. Consensus doesn't quite seem to have been reached, and we may have a lot to discuss now that malth's been replaced. I guess we can wait another day or two before deciding though.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Greasy Spot requested replacement. I'm busy finding one.

[CoheedCambria09]

Hey sorry for not posting more, I've been busy with school and haven't been getting along with the parents too well. I'll try to contribute more in the next couple days, but then I'm gone on the weekend to a conference, so hopefully it will be night then.

[Amor]

We only have 3 days left - do we want to ask for that three-day extension today? Personally, I think we should. Consensus doesn't quite seem to have been reached, and we may have a lot to discuss now that malth's been replaced. I guess we can wait another day or two before deciding though.

Eh, I think that we should save the extension for later. It's day 1, so we aren't going off much - another three days wouldn't provide us with a lot more than Malth's defense. The extension would be more useful if we were in lylo or something and had more evidence to go through.

[Amor]

EBWOP: I gues that would be Smokedank's defense now.

[goborage]

Agree with caf/Amor. I think a deadline extension would be appropriate seeing as how new replacements are here/coming.

Mod: Can we get an extension?

[Macavenger]

Checking in. Not much to add at the moment, waiting on Smoke.

[OG Smokedank]

not gonna lie i havent read the thread yet, its finals week so ive been busy

soon as i have time i'll get to it

[caf19]

Agree with caf/Amor. I think a deadline extension would be appropriate seeing as how new replacements are here/coming.

Lol, Amor actually said he didn't want to use the extension. However, if Smoke is gonna take a couple of days to get an opinion in then that's more reason why we should use it.

[Shepherd_of_Wolves]

IMO, I think that we deserve a free extension if we take one, because when the MOD left for a week is when everyone quite playing. He was not here to prod or replace. This is circumstances beyond our control when our key suspect fled. I think this should be an exception because of the whole situation.

Travis looks like he needs to be

prodded

hard and possibly replaced.

If the deadline stands, I do not think we should take the extension. We started asking two or three days ago and that is all that we have talked about. We have 2 days remaining. That makes 3 days of wasted conversation and 2 more days to do something. I feel like we should quit wasting days.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Travis has been prodded.

And I guess my absence had its impact indeed. I'm giving you a

three day's extension

, because of my absence and the amount of replacements.

[CoheedCambria09]

Limited to no Access until Monday May 12th

[Macavenger]

Ok, I need to inject a bit of unfortunate reality here.

At this time, we need to be piling more votes on OG Smokedank. Deadline is getting close, and unless we hear a very compelling defense from her soon, she needs to be today's lynch. Deadline rules in this game do not give us a reduced lynching requirement at deadline, so we need to get 7 votes on someone before then. No-lynching Day 1 is almost always bad, and particularly so in this game, as we really need to find out an alignment to help sort out who the scum are.

This means we have about 5 days to get 3 more votes on Smoke. Since we don't even know if she's going to have time to mount a significant defense, we need to get at least 1 or 2 of those in place now - trying to pile on 3 at the last minute is not something I want to risk. I don't want to lynch Smoke without giving her more of a chance to talk, but we may have no choice here.

We should also start talking now about who else we might want to go for in the event that Smoke comes up with some really compelling reason not to lynch her. If that's the case, we're pretty much going to have to try to assemble a speed wagon of 7 votes on someone else, and the only real way we're going to be able to do that is if we know ahead of time where it's going. This difficulty of shifting the wagon at this point is the reason we need to be voting up Smoke now, and means we really shouldn't be trying to shift it unless she has an extremely compelling reason to believe she's town.

For now stating who you'd be willing to lynch other than Smoke if it comes to that is probably good. If we do end up needing to shift the wagon, I'd probably be willing to go for DBE or goborage. The way DBE has been waffling about the Malthusis wagon is fairly scummy independent of his alignment as well as the defending thing, and I don't like goborage's lack of effort or his trying to define when is and is not good times to defend someone; seems pretty self serving to me.

Mod:

At what time on May 12th will deadline fall?

[DarlaBlueEyes]

I am willing to hammer smoke if it comes to that, but I really hope to get a reply from her first.

My only reasoning is that other than a really dumb play on Malth's part early on then going into lurkdom (lol it looks reaaally bad for him/smoke)

He hadn't posted enough to give off a ton of scum tells, thats the only reason why I hesitate. I would like a post but if none comes by deadline I will be the one to hammer.

[Cogito Ergo Scum]

Deadline will fall on May 12th in the evening. I can't be any more precise, because I'll be busy that day, but I'll have time in the evening. I live on GMT+1.

[caf19]

I live around that timezone, so I expect I'll be able to be around within the few hours before deadline. Therefore, I'm not voting until nearer deadline, especially as Smoke hasn't posted yet. If we aren't lynching Smoke, then Darla or Travis would be my choice (unless it turns out that Travis wasn't lurking by choice and genuinely needs replacing).

[CoheedCambria09]

I'm leaving right now, but I'll

Vote: OGSmokeDank

I might be back to switch my vote, not sure though.

[Amor]

I agree that we definitely need to make a lynch today. I don't think the case on Smokedank is particularly strong, but he's better than a no lynch.

What time is "evening GMT+1" in EST?