Mini 617 - Scottish Mafia, Game Over

[dcorbe]

Vote: starkmoon

because I want to see what happens when I vote for the mod for once.

[dcorbe]

You get replaced... or even modkilled...

Sounds like a little bit of wishful thinking on your part.

[dcorbe]

Erratus Apathos

If that was your reason surely you'd at least FOS everyone else without an avatar.

The problem is you're the only one here without an avatar. Typically 99% of those asked will oblige and find avatars to use on this board.

[dcorbe]

I did warn you, dcorbe.

I don't know why you felt the need to warn me at all. We're still pretty much well entrenched into the random voting phase.

And kuribo, in defence of my name... bite me.

Wow, OMGUS much?

FoS: q21

for expecting anyone to take anything seriously at this point in the game.

[dcorbe]

Wow, OMGUS much?

FoS: q21 for expecting anyone to take anything seriously at this point in the game.

Where did you get the idea he was being serious? O.o

He "warned me" about the dangers of voting for the mod, then when she posted in response to my vote, he "I told you so'd" me and OMGUSed kuribo in the same breath.

[dcorbe]

fair enough.

[dcorbe]

Holy bejesus, there's two people without an avatar? If I was the third guy on your team I'd be really pissed at the both of you for giving away yourselves this early.

The votes right now are pretty much random, but this this sounds like you're breadcrumming about your involvement with others.

Unvote Vote: Erratus Apathos

[dcorbe]

I'm not sure I get how Erratus's post could be construed as "breadcrumming" (sic) ... mind explaining that one?

I'm just trying to get a pressure wagon going on someone so we can do as you suggested below, rather than simply saying "we should move past the random voting stage now" and doing nothing about it. You've basically just ensured that no wagon will form.

And I also think we can probably move past the "random voting" since we're on page three.

FoS: Massive

for being anti-scumhunting

[dcorbe]

EBWOP because my quote tags came out messed up

I'm not sure I get how Erratus's post could be construed as "breadcrumming" (sic) ... mind explaining that one?

I'm just trying to get a pressure wagon going on someone so we can do as you suggested below, rather than simply saying "we should move past the random voting stage now" and doing nothing about it. You've basically just ensured that no wagon will form.

And I also think we can probably move past the "random voting" since we're on page three.

FoS: Massive

for being anti-scumhunting

[dcorbe]

Holy bejesus, there's two people without an avatar? If I was the third guy on your team I'd be really pissed at the both of you for giving away yourselves this early.

How do you know how many players is on a team?

Hi guys!! That's what I meant by breadcrumming! THANKS!

FoWhatIsWrongWithYou: dcorbe because I think it's pretty obvious that EA is not breadcrumbing, and exiting the random voting stage is not anti-scumhunting. Your posts are really weird and you take everything seriously, what's with that?

What's wrong with taking anything seriously? You can take something seriously and still have fun with it. I'd be concerned about anyone who is able to coast through a game without making a serious attempt at scum hunting. It's in the town's best interests to take a few things seriously and it's in the scum's best interests not to.

And you've just removed all pressure by stating that it's only for pressure.

QFT and to state the obvious that you guys need to stop jumping on people for early votes. Most early D1 wagons fall apart anyways. It's time to start trying to turn up the pressure a bit here.

[dcorbe]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

[dcorbe]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

What part of "Give me a reason" do you not understand?

You were given a reason. So now you're going to sit there and OMGUS me because you don't like the reasoning?

Let me try this again...

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

Well at least you didn't call me out for saying we were on Page 3 when we were still on Page 2. But it was a nice attempt. I'm much more interested in your own three-related slip-up though.

vote Erratus

Are you even reading what I've said about that post or are you just being opportunistic? It wasn't a "slip-up", it was a completely intentional assumption based on the bloody format standard. Jesus, it's like I'm the only one here with any experience at all playing mini-normals.

You CAN'T ASSUME that every mini is going to be set up the same way, because they're not. How many minis have you completed since february that you have SO much more experience than the rest of us? 3? maybe 4?

[dcorbe]

@q21: Way to twist my words. It's not time to be serious over random votes, but my wagoning Erratus is not without reason. There's nothing wrong with turning up the pressure on someone to see where their breaking point is.

[dcorbe]

They weren't serious - but they were intentional, to see who jumped on them.

Design by hindsight, obviously

[dcorbe]

No just design, but believe what you will.

Also, I got the impression that it was not, or at least not just, the random votes you thought I was getting serious about.

Like I said bro, I don't understand why you felt the need to warn me. If it was a random comment then fine, I can accept that, but why aren't you going after anyone else wagoning him for the same reason that I am?

[dcorbe]

[quote="q21"] Mostly because you were the first to get on that wagon for a reason I don't particularly think is worth of the size the wagon has reached.[/q21]

I personally don't have a problem pushing wagons up to L-3 or L-2. It's called pressure voting, but the thing about it is if you call it "pressure voting" you're telegraphing your intentions and it really isn't pressure any more after that. This early in the game weak justification for votes is not a scum tell because it really only serves to push us past the random stage

When people hit L-2 they tend to spill a lot of scum tells, and most early D1 wagons fall apart anyways.

Picking apart early wagons under the guise of "that's not a good reason to vote for someone" is anti-town because you've basically just ensured that this wagon will fall apart. Your anti-scum-hunting stance is ultimately going to hurt the town.

Unvote

Vote: q21

[dcorbe]

Um... OMGUS much?

First you say that most early day one wagons fall apart, which is perfectly true... then you vote for me for actions which could lead to an early day one wagon falling apart. Why do you think that early D1 lbandwagons fall apart?

If people didn't pick apart the early wagons based on "that's not a good reason to vote for someone" then those early wagons would end up being the day one lynches.

I don't see too many bandwagons falling apart because people pick them apart. I see them fall apart after the town has sufficiently pulled enough information out of them to consider concentrating on other targets for wagons. Even if they are pulled apart by someone else it's usually after a good amount of WIOFMy logic has been tossed into it.

You've ensured that this wagon is going to fall apart well before we've gotten anything useful out of it at all. Thank you.

And as far as OMGUS is concerned, I voted for you with some reasonable justification. Look up the definition of OMGUS:

OMGUS: Oh My God! You Suck!. Usually used in the context of an 'OMGUS vote' - i.e. a vote for someone purely on the basis that they are voting for you.

I'll quote that again and highlight the interesting part of that

OMGUS: Oh My God! You Suck!. Usually used in the context of an 'OMGUS vote' - i.e. a vote for someone

purely on the basis that they are voting for you.

That implies a BASELESS vote, and I provided some justification for my vote.

You're playing silly little word association games with me and I

DON'T

like it

Confirm Vote: q21

[dcorbe]

No, by unvoting him EA you are in fact the one who ensured that the EA wagon would fall apart, I just said I didn't like it. I don't see how my posting could stop you getting info out of EA.

No sir! YOU ensured that the wagon would fall apart when I had to telegraph my intentions to answer your idiotic and WIOFMy vote justification on me!

[dcorbe]

Because EA would never have guessed that that was what was happening... right...

He wasn't doing a very good job of it up until that point.

[dcorbe]

Erratus: You're at L-2 right now. What do you have to say?

[dcorbe]

kuribo- is there a reason you don't put your vote where your mouth is?

Probably because I don't feel three pages of discussion is enough to warrant putting 5 votes on EA just yet?

Although I see roflcoptor disagrees.

I've seen more than a few games get stalled in inanities because people say "oh, it's too soon to...". I don't think a relatively quick pace is a bad thing, as it makes it easier to retain original members and keep everyone engaged.

You're misunderstanding me. I've often gone on record to say that towns are far too timid--- but this doesn't necessarily mean that I'd be comfortable with his lynch right this moment.

Certainly his "slip," and his extreme overreaction to the slightest bit of criticism bears further discussion than just a quicklynch.

Nobody is trying to lynch him. We're wagoning him to try and get some useful tells out of him. It's a common tactic. At L-2 he's in no danger of getting lynched any time soon and most early D1 wagons fall apart anyways.

[dcorbe]

At L-2 he's in no danger of getting lynched any time soon and most early D1 wagons fall apart anyways.

Stop it. Whenever I see this, I see you saying, "We can push a wagon as far as we want, but don't worry you're in no danger, and if you're lynched, it was an accident."

If he were lynched right now and flipped town it would likely be scum hammering. If scum were to jump on the wagon right now for the quick hammer, it would be obvious what they were doing. It would be very stupid to quick-lynch him right now.

So again, he's in no danger of being lynched at L-2 because it would take not 1 but 2 more people to jump on.

[dcorbe]

@Cephrir:

I do understand what bredcrumbing is. In the context of mafia it means to hint at your role or alignment. Is that not what he's doing?

If he were lynched right now and flipped town it would likely be scum hammering

So would you not find it suspicious if two more people were to hop on the wagon right now? If scum wouldn't be that careless then he's in no danger of being lynched, now is he? What reason would a townie have to hammer him so early in the game?

dcorbe's q21 vote is OMGUSy and not particularly well-founded. His EA vote was actually based on a tell, not an "anti-scumhunting attitude", even if EA's "slip-up" isn't the greatest tell ever.

I gave justification for my vote. Just because it was in response to him voting for me doesn't make it OMGUSy. Look up the definition of the term.

The rest of your post seems to be attacking me for wagoning someone. You've admitted that his wagon is producing useful information in some respect, at least with is interaction with kurbio anyways.

Oh and as far as this is concerned:

As I mentioned, this post is weird. What massive said was not the least bit "anti-scumhunting".

It's quite "anti-scumhunting" to sit there and preach about how I'm wagoning baselessly and then proclaim that it's time to "move past the "random voting" since we're on page three." offering NOTHING to help further that cause.

I've already explained what my stance is on early wagoning, so I'm not going to go through that process again.

[dcorbe]

dcorbe, next time you say that nobody is trying to lynch the guy who's been wagoned to lynch-2, go dunk your head in cold water and realign your conceptions of reality. i for one never vote for someone outside of random voting that I don't want to see lynched.

Maybe "nobody" is a bad choice of word, but you obviously don't wagon for information much if you don't understand the difference between a vote with intent to lynch and a vote with intent to pressure.

I now know that having tunnel vision is more of a play style thing with you than a tell but quick lynches are bad. Maybe you need to be wagoned a few more times yourself before you're going to realize that.

[dcorbe]

*sigh*

Let's hear what his replacement has to say *grumbles*.

[dcorbe]

I'm going to go ahead and hammer, mostly because I've replaced into a similar situation before and I hated it

Unvote

Vote: erratus apathos

[dcorbe]

TWILIGHT
star bright
First star I see tonight
I wish I may I wish I might
Have this wish I wish tonight

I wish I hammered correctly

[dcorbe]

actually i think we may still be one short, but i'm sure with all the erratus hate from the people who have been afraid to vote there's a hammer waiting to fall.

You're right.

[dcorbe]

Well he's at L-1 so maybe someone can replace in and claim

[dcorbe]

Do you want me to hammer, because I will (not afraid to lynch him, I already stated I find it extremely scummy to replace when pressured

unvote

Please go ahead and hammer.

[dcorbe]

Now my nursery rhyme about hammers applies

[dcorbe]

dcorbe

: Can you explain how you went from "wait for his replacement" to "I'll hammer him" (even though you didn't) to "maybe his replacement can claim" in regards to your opinion about Erratus in the span of about twenty hours?

I decided Lowell had a good point. As I indicated I've replaced into similar situations before. I thought about it some and I was sure that he was scum so I decided it wouldn't be fair to someone coming it to try and defend themselves or to come into the game only to claim.

FoWhatIsWrongWithYou: dcorbe because I think it's pretty obvious that EA is not breadcrumbing, and exiting the random voting stage is not anti-scumhunting. Your posts are really weird and you take everything seriously, what's with that?

Trying REALLY hard to shoot down a perfectly legitimate reason to start an early wagon on someone... but he's going to hang back a bit after this and wait for someone else to jump on me so that he can look pro town later on.

q21 does eventually starts picking apart my wagon on post 60 but I noted that Cybele was already first on my wagon at this point.

After sparring with q21 a bit, he begins attacking me by proxy (post 73).

q21 wrote:
No, by unvoting him EA you are in fact the one who ensured that the EA wagon would fall apart, I just said I didn't like it. I don't see how my posting could stop you getting info out of EA.
Brought aup a good point here. Dcorbe isn't too willing to hold onto the bandwagon that he engineered, despite him being so sure it was under valid pretenses, and with information to gain. Now, even if his suspicions about q21 are correct, the only reason q21 would have to jump on dcorbe is if Erratus is his scumbuddy. Why else disrupt the lynch, and bring suspicion on himself? We could have at least pressured some information from Erratus, and moved on to q21. Instead, dcorbe noticed his bandwagon being picked at, and attacked. I don't htink dcorbe has enough invested in his bandwagons to be town.
q21 wrote:
And anyway, assuming three scum at the beginning of a 12 player game is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. It doesn't really help anyone much, but it isn't some outrageous assumption that indicates that he must know something. Yes, its perfectly possible that it was a scum slip, but it really isn't enough to justify the L-2 wagon on him.

Not a bad reason for day one, but we have two better suspects right now. I believe q21 is less suspicious, but that's me.
Confirm Vote: dcorbe

He doesn't post again until 104, when he realized that EA was going to get lynched no matter what he did and he FoSes EA with very little good reasoning in an attempt to distance himself. A complete reversal, mind you, from his previous position.

He does take the opportunity to take another pot-shot at me though hoping the mere appearance of impropriety on my part will help him save face when his scum buddy flips.

Then he drops off the planet again...

Just got back from work. i'll do the honors.

unvote, vote Erratus Apathos

Then comes back to drop the hammer in order to distance himself some more from his scum partner.

Looking at the wagon that formed on me on D1:

dcorbe (4): cybele, Erratus, q21, empking

EA wasn't the only scum on that wagon, methinks.

I'm having a hard time deciding if q21 is scum or if he's just extremely misguided, so I'm happy to leave him alive today in favor of a cybele lynch to see how his interactions with the rest of the group continue to pan out.

In conclusion:

HoS: q21,

mostly for a protracted argument with me in an attempt to derail the EA wagon[/b]

IGMEOY: empking,

mostly for post 76 which is an extremely misguided attempt to pick apart my wagon because I decided to go after q21 in order to shut down his coup on the EA wagon.

Vote: cybele

[dcorbe]

First off, your first Cybele quote is actually from me. Secondly, I don't really agree. You're basing both of your top two suspects almost entirely on interactions with you. What you said about Cybele especially... everything you say about him, you label him as scum and then say why, as scum, he is doing what he's doing, while it's entirely reasonable for a townie to do the same. I believe I expressed my concerns with your q21 suspicions yesterday. Having an argument with you =! attempting to derail a wagon. You're just deciding that they have scummy motives for no real reason.

What's wrong with drawing conclusions from his interactions with me? Especially considering I was practically the only one he interacted with.

Notice I dinged him for his actions too, chiefly:

1) He was so adamantly against an EA wagon
2) He lurked
3) He attacked me opportunistically using someone else's argument against me
4) He lurked some more
5) He hammered someone whose wagon he was against.

[dcorbe]

But even with the assumption that EA was going to be eventually lynched one way or another, do you think it would be good scumplay on Cybele's part to hammer his/her partner? People WERE clamoring for a replacement, despite how detrimental it could have been to the game. If Cybele is scum, why not ride it out a bit?

IF he is scum (as you say) why would letting him ride it out be a good idea? Who would you propose we concentrate on instead?

Do you believe that a Cybele wagon would have any merit at all at this point?

[dcorbe]

BTW I don't like all this blatant defending going on. If you care to hop on a bandwagon because you agree with my reasoning that's fine, but if you blast me before the target of my aggression has a chance to respond to me, then it sort of comes off like you're not actually interested in doing any scum hunting at all.

[dcorbe]

I've already explained why I felt it necessary to put a vote out there on q21, but I'll go through the process again because it keeps coming up. This will probably be the last time I say this before I start ignoring it.

1) I felt as if the EA wagon was going to fall apart because I had to telegraph my intentions to get q21 to stop his relentless assault on my wagon.

I was just simply wrong in this assumption

2) I'm not demanding that anyone be targeted, though I still support the wagoning process in its fullest. I tried to make my case against cybele and it isn't panning out like I had hoped, but I'm not sitting here arguing with people about it like you seem to enjoy doing.

[dcorbe]

But dcorbe, you're supposed to argue your cases, not just make them and hope a wagon forms.

And when he drops some more scum tells so that I have more to go on I'll continue arguing the case. This goes back to what I was saying about people blasting me before I can get responses from the people I'm targeting directly. Why should he respond now? Someone else already shut me down on his behalf.

I would have really preferred to hear what HE had to say, not you or massive or Cephrir.

Notice I haven't unvoted him yet, or even stated that my suspicion has subsided. I'm still interested in HIS response to my criticisms

[dcorbe]

@q21:

and BTW all you seem to do is twist my words around and strawman me. I would definitely call that an all out assault.

What do you think of roflcopter's use of the word "chainsaw" to describe your actions yesterday?