Mini #553: Over!

[ting =)]

@bab.
Fair enough. You're right about your objections. I didn't really attack massive though, I just wanted to say that I'd do that tomorrow. If my quote:

I also think massive is scum, and for other reasons besides that. I think it's counterproductive to go for two people though, so I'll vote:shamrock and leave massive for tomorrow.

made you think that, I'd like to clarify that I have no intention of going after massive today and that my post was talking about who I'd attack tomorrow, I was not setting up a lynch.

I can't remember the numbers, but do a search of coolbot's posts, and arrange them newest first.

I'm too lazy to type out what I think of it right now, so I'll just copy something from one of my previous posts:
[quote="ting"=]Towards the end of the day, he votes Qman. His case on Qman is the shortest of all his votes, it's only 5 lines total spread over 3 posts. His last post was when he unvoted Qman to hammer.
[/quote]

[ting =)]

er, i messed up the tags. also, by some weird coincidence, i have the first post in the last three pages.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

er, i messed up the tags. also, by some weird coincidence, i have the first post in the last three pages.

Obviously you're scum.

[destructor]

LOL.

Ok, I'm going to reread Imat/shamrock since there seems to be some momentum there. I can't say I recall anything obvious about him.

My read of massive still = very scummy, so I'm not sure I understand why people who say they also find him scummy don't want to lynch him today.

[ting =)]

zomg! you caught me! /runs.

@destructor.
I don't mind a massive lynch but the shamrock wagon was building up faster, and since I find both suspicious, I figured to go for Shamrock first.

mod:

could we have a vote count?

[massive]

What? This would apply to any vig who shoots night 1. And how does the fact that you disagree with vigging on night 1 influence whether you put pressure on a person the next day? There's nothing wrong with shooting at someone that you think is scummy. There's a lot wrong with wanting to get a claim from a vig.

I completely disagree, and this won't be resolved here. I think that any vig that's randomly shooting on Night One should be held accountable for their actions, because they are clearly not working in the interest of the town. Maybe here you guys shoot first and ask questions later, but to me, it's grossly irresponsible.

ting

: I believe he's Mafia and have said so, numerous times. I think you're playing semantics here.

[Matt_S]

What? This would apply to any vig who shoots night 1. And how does the fact that you disagree with vigging on night 1 influence whether you put pressure on a person the next day? There's nothing wrong with shooting at someone that you think is scummy. There's a lot wrong with wanting to get a claim from a vig.

I completely disagree, and this won't be resolved here. I think that any vig that's randomly shooting on Night One should be held accountable for their actions, because they are clearly not working in the interest of the town. Maybe here you guys shoot first and ask questions later, but to me, it's grossly irresponsible.

How's a vig supposed to do things? How do you know it was random? How's a vig supposed to ask questions of people they're going to kill without exposing themselves?

I think I may be starting to change my mind.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Ting: you yourself noted that coolbot's case against Qman was very short. I don't know how this makes Qman not mafia. A mafia member won't want to write a convincing case against his own teammate, and Coolbot's post ( it is

282

) is anything but convincing.

Ting: do you still think this is evidence for Qman's innocence.

More @ Ting:
"the shamrock wagon was building up faster"
So you joined it? Because it was easier to lynch them? Please explain yourself. This sounds really bad for you.

[massive]

The what? A vigilante has no business killing on Night One. Any vig who claims that they are so confident that they can kill on Night One is either reckless or grossly and incorrectly overconfident. I'm sorry that you think that it's OK to shoot on night one. I don't.

[ting =)]

I completely disagree, and this won't be resolved here. I think that any vig that's randomly shooting on Night One should be held accountable for their actions, because they are clearly not working in the interest of the town. Maybe here you guys shoot first and ask questions later, but to me, it's grossly irresponsible.

Theory discussion, to which I disagree. Either way, there's no point to this discussion since you said you think Qman is mafia.

ting: I believe he's Mafia and have said so, numerous times. I think you're playing semantics here.

If you meant mafia, you would have said mafia. Instead, you said killer, and then switched to mafia once I pointed out that the remaining killer is probably a vig. If anyone else had done that, wouldn't you find it suspicious the way his story keeps changing?

Ting: you yourself noted that coolbot's case against Qman was very short. I don't know how this makes Qman not mafia. A mafia member won't want to write a convincing case against his own teammate, and Coolbot's post ( it is 282 ) is anything but convincing.

Ting: do you still think this is evidence for Qman's innocence.

I did not mention it as a defense of Qman. It was just information I thought I'd mention. After I bring it up, I point out:

I'm not discarding the possibility that it's bussing, but I see no reason to suspect qman right now.

to clarify that it's not something I'm making a big deal out of.

"the shamrock wagon was building up faster"
So you joined it?

Because it was easier to lynch them?

Please explain yourself. This sounds really bad for you.

yes.

It only sounds bad if you don't take it in context of my earlier posts.

Note, that at the end of day 1, I said:

After my reread, I decided that the people I think are most likely to be scum are coolbot,

imat, massive.

I'm not sure yet how to arrange them until we find out new stuff come day 2.

That has not changed. I still think that they both might be scum, and now that it's day 2, I'm going for them. I have reason to think that they're scum. I can't push for both their lynch. So I had to pick one. I picked Imat/Shamrock.

[MeMe]

I'm doing what I can to get hold of shaka!! -- he was prodded more than 48 hours ago and has yet to respond. If he's not back in another 48 hours, I'll probably have to close the game. If it comes to that point & at least half of you have let me know, via PM, that you're desperate to continue, I'll do my best to find a replacement moderator.

[Matt_S]

Ignoring MeMe temporarily...

The what? A vigilante has no business killing on Night One. Any vig who claims that they are so confident that they can kill on Night One is either reckless or grossly and incorrectly overconfident. I'm sorry that you think that it's OK to shoot on night one. I don't.

Why can the town lynch on day 1 if the vig can't kill on night 1?

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Ting: that would be pretty freaking incredible if you're right about Imat and Shamrock. That would mean you pegged 3 scum in just one read-through.

Matt_S, you bring up an extremely good point:

Why can the town lynch on day 1 if the vig can't kill on night 1?

I never thought about it that way before. I guess the difference is that there has been no additional information. If the town mislynched the first day, the town was obviously mislead, so maybe the vig would be mislead also? That's the only counter argument I can see.

Another point. Let's not forget the possibility that we could have a compulsive vig. Just in case we do, (or even just in case we have

any vig at all

) I think that we as town should decide who the vig should kill. If that person ends up dead the next night, I would more easily believe that a vig exists.

Meme:

one of the problems is that almost half of the players (literally, there's three needed prods. This is an 8 person game) are not active.

[massive]

The difference between the town lynching (a group of people agreeing, via consensus, on a suspicious person to kill) and the vig killing (a single person making their own decision on a suspicious person to kill) should be obvious. It's checks and balances. Town members are required, during the day, to do their best to hunt scum, because their track record, arguments, and votes are in the thread for all to see. The vig has no accountability and therefore is immune to scrutiny.

And ting, if you want to get all semantic-y on me, we still don't have any proof we have a vig.

[ting =)]

@massive.
o.O We had

three

nks. The mafia have one. The SK obviously had one. That leaves one nk unaccounted for.

I think the logical conclusion is that it's a vig.

Three

anti town killing roles in a 12 player game? No way. Even if he's not a vig, I'm pretty sure the last killing role is at least a pro-town role.

@massive v matt vig thing.
I think the whole vig-shouldn't-nk-debate was already had somewhere in MD. I'll have to hunt it down later, but just to throw in my 2 cents:

I don't think we should shut down the vig. Then he'll be nothing more than a townie, we're essentially costing the town a power role. That's bad. I'm fine with the idea of the town deciding who the vig should kill. That boils down to us having two lynches per day. We'll have to spend a bit more time discussing, but I'm okay with that.

If we do that, the vig becomes a gun that the town wields and points around. The only problem would be if the vig objects to the nk choice, but then a vigilante by definition

is

outside the law. He's not supposed to be accountable to anyone, including us. Either way, the vig is a pro-town role. I don't think he'd do anything completely detrimental to the town as it'd be against his win condition as well.

If we decide to direct the vig though, we should decide first if we're all in favor of it, don't throw names around yet. That'll just give the mafia ideas. We also have to be wary of the mafia trying to manipulate the vig's kill, but then it'd be the same with lynching someone anyway.

The other choice is to just trust the vig. I'm okay with that too. Last night a cop, a godfather and an sk died. That gives a 2/3 chance that the vig caught a bad guy.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

. I'm fine with the idea of the town deciding who the vig should kill. That boils down to us having two lynches per day. We'll have to spend a bit more time discussing, but I'm okay with that.

Deciding this round is the most important, because we can figure out if there actually is a vig or not.

Assuming the third killer is pro-town

, we could ask the person to only follow the killing plans if they are a vig. We still don't know if the third kill came from a CPR doc or some other kind of pro-town killing role I don't know about.

If we decide to direct the vig though, we should decide first if we're all in favor of it, don't throw names around yet.

I'm in favor of directing a possible vig

The other choice is to just trust the vig. I'm okay with that too. Last night a cop, a godfather and an sk died. That gives a 2/3 chance that the vig caught a bad guy.

I think we should direct the kill because we can make sure the vig gets rid of who the town thinks is the scummiest player. If the vig plays on their own, we could end up with mislynches by attacking who we think is the scummiest player during the day.

[Matt_S]

I'd rather not direct the vig, but I'm lazy enough to not try and stop you guys.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Why don't you want to direct the vig?

[Matt_S]

Why don't you want to direct the vig?

Well, say we vote on who the vig should kill, and we happen to pick the vig. Obviously he won't kill himself. So the next day, the mafia know who the vig is. Alternatively, any kill the vig disagrees with would be a great choice for the mafia to kill the next night. Plus, anything that gives the mafia more influence over our affairs is undesirable.

[ting =)]

I was going to post something, but it seems Matt beat me to it.

Directing the vig would be like batman walking into the police station with a tie over his bat suit and going, 'so, fellas, who should I go for today?'

The remaining players seem reasonable enough that whoever is vig probably won't do anything stupid. I'm still fine with either option, but I'd rather just trust the vig because it's less of a hassle.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I do really hope we even

have

a vig. I wish we had a cop, too.
If you guys are willing to trust the "possible vig," I guess I will too.

Anyway, I hope everyone here asks Meme to find a replacement mod if Shaka!! doesn't come back in 24 hours.

[ting =)]

Yep, I asked for a replacement mod.

Also, I'm pretty sure we have a vig. Or at least, I see no conceivable reason why we should assume the killing role is anti town.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Shaka!! didn't come back. Either we get a new mod, or this game is over.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

EBWOP: Here are the prods we need if we get a new mod.

Prod: Qman

It's been

thirty seven days

now. Is that a record?

Prod: Khelvaster

It's been 13 days. Almost two weeks.

Prod: Shamrock

It's been 13 days. The last thing Khelv and Sham both did was respond to my first post, and both of them not liking it.

[Matt_S]

*crosses fingers*