Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[raider8169]

/confirm

[raider8169]

right, it's time to start signing secret treaties. Raider, what do you think?

BM

Hmmm not so secret if we make it in open forum. Maybe no one will read and catch on.

[raider8169]

This is true. Good to see you're thinking! We could always become Nominal Masons. Meaning we work together, as a pair, in nailing these filthy scumbags. So, how about it?

BM

Sounds like a plan, you vote for scum, I will vote for scum. They die we win!

[raider8169]

Feaken A peple!! I want in on the treaty but it seems there are already too many to get in on it!

Thats it, if I cant be in the treaty I will make a new treaty! Yeah ok so I wont, Im not good enough for that.

[raider8169]

I am sorry everyone that I just dropped off. I have some stuff happen that was out of my control. I was going to skim and make some sort of post however I would need to read like 10 pages to catch up. If I am slowing the game down please replace me however if you guys can wait until the end of the week I would like to get back into this game. Sorry agian.

[raider8169]

Im back everyone, I had some family problems but things are as well as they can be. I will read and post more tomorrow. Sorry if I caused any delays.

[raider8169]

Holy crap!

This was hard to catch up with. With so much to read I had a hard time trying to build something on someone. I was not a fan of a few people but most of the was during the confirmation stage. Nothing really stood out to me but I read like 20 pages so I will need to look at certain people and make something of that.

[raider8169]

Woah, dude, don't get pissy because you aren't the only one who is allowed to post alot. That said, this reaction is pretty standard from Armlx.

The issue is the runner posts just cause the thread to extent longer and longer for no reason, which makes rereads practically impossible. Not to mention reading it the first time is obnoxious.

I find that if it is broken up its easier to read. I hate quote trains they just get confusing to me. Then again maybe its just me and if that is the case I will shut up.

[raider8169]

On the topic of vote-hopping, what do you guys think of this?

Its a minor scum tell but right now as no one as a solid case anything is possible.

[raider8169]

Sorry you dont have much on me. That will change. I hate missing all that time I missed alot that you posted.

You get points in my book for taking the time to do that, not that it means anything right now.

[raider8169]

This game is freaken hard to keep up with. When I can get like an hour set a side I hope to post something worth reading. I am not one for long posts but I need the time to read everything a couple of times.

[raider8169]

FFS guys. Some of you are complaining about posts being too long, others are complaining about them being too frequent. you cant have it both ways. Sort it out amongst yourselves, because i cant keep EVERYONE happy. -.-

BM

There's an easy way to achieve both. All you have to do is get rid of the quote pyramids and you'll have eliminated 80% of the annoyance right there.

I like the quote pyramids so I know what post he is responding to and I dont have to look up that post to remember. If alot of the crap can be cut out of them it might help.

[raider8169]

Rolefishing to the extreme. If he tells you how he knows, that has a chance of outing a power role for the mafia to kill(not that that may not already have happened, I don't know what morph is thinking). Sorry for the shut up, but that post screamed scum at me so much that I had to stop it from getting anywhere.

If he knows something about the role that wouldnt make it scummy as wouldnt he need to be town to have something on the role to give out? It seemed to me like he had a feeling, or atleast nothing was solid. I could be wrong of course.

[raider8169]

raider- please post some actual content

I have been sucking out in this game. I read like 20 pages in one sitting and it was an overload for me. Once I have the time to read it agian and this time take notes I should be more helpful, until them I am useless and that is why I have yet to vote.

[raider8169]

IT'S LOWELL!!!!!

Do you have a list of people that are automaticly town or scum? You got way to excited over one person.

Ok im going back to lurking in plain sight until I can get find enough time to reread everything.

[raider8169]

rofl. Since when did i make any comment on Lowell's affiliation?

You didnt, it was just kind of creepy.

[raider8169]

@Netlava, I remember that game, though it was my first I didnt see you acting very scummy more you just backed yourself in a corner either way just because someone uses that phrase doesn't make them automatically scum.

@hasdgfas It easier to keep up with the game as it is going which is what I mainly do. To backtrack at this point will take me a while. I normally only have 5-10 minutes here and there so I drop in post in one or 2 games and leave for a bit. Its doesnt work in a game this size so I am trying to figure out a way that will.

[raider8169]

2. Everything that I have on Dynamo I've said already. The pact hop was EXTREMELY scummy, possibly worse then vote hopping someone like that.

I am in the process of rereading and I just got past that part. I didnt see how his change in thought was that scummy. It is something I am keeping in mind while I finish reading but it doesnt seem like a big deal to me.

[raider8169]

I am in the process of rereading and I just got past that part. I didnt see how his change in thought was that scummy. It is something I am keeping in mind while I finish reading but it doesnt seem like a big deal to me.

No, I'm talking about Dynamo trying to /in on the pact.

Post 58 right? He said "ohh ohh", so I assume that to mean he understood something he didnt before and then in the same post he did the "/treaty" thing.

If not I am sure I will come across that point sooner or later.

[raider8169]

I like EA's case on Armlx, and it's like, an actual case as opposed to his earlier vote hopping escapades. I endorse this bandwagon

unvote

vote - Armlx

What about it did you like? This seems like an opportunistic vote.

[raider8169]

Sorry everyone for dropping off. I have been catching up and will have something of importance up sometime soon.

[raider8169]

he has replied to a prod.

Yeah, I'm still here, but the game has kind of slowed down, so I don't really see much that I have to say at the moment.

This is good for me as I never thought going back to school would be so time consuming. I had to read alot and then reread cause people were quoteing all sorts of stuff.

nhat 283 I really dislike the post but I dont see why people want him lynched over it. I dont consider it a scum tell though.

Dynamo, jumping on many different bandwagons this early in the game (forgot to write down where this was pointed out but it was early) doesnt stand out that much to me. Things can change very quickly. I have noticed many people jumping as I kept reading. Not a scum tell to me.

Cass 399 I really agree with, vote trails can help you figure things out later in the game if you refer back to them. It doesnt always leave a trail but with a game this size I am sure it can be used later if someone is keeping track.

People are jumping on everyone for the little and stupidest things. Not sure if it is all intentional or not but most of it is crap. I have yet to find a case I can agree with. I should be making my own case but a few posts after I notice something someone else points it out.

[raider8169]

People are jumping on everyone for the little and stupidest things. Not sure if it is all intentional or not but most of it is crap. I have yet to find a case I can agree with. I should be making my own case but a few posts after I notice something someone else points it out.

If you want to make your own case, but someone else points it out before you can say it, then why do you think every case is bad? And are you suspicious of ANYONE?

At the moment I have seen quite a few people jump the gun on something I see as weak but just because I dont see what they do doesn't mean they are automatically scum. I still have more pages as I am trying to find the cases on the larger bandwagons at hand. I have read peoples case but I want to read how they posted it so I have everything in context.

[raider8169]

Netlava (502) If someone wants to defend someone else is it not always a scum tell, minor or not. If I post something and you interpret it differently then someone else while being wrong someone else might defend me to explain that you did not read my post correctly. That would not make that person scum just because they pointed that out.

DynamoXI role fishing does seem to be pushing more then I have normaly seen. Though town could do the same thing, curiosity can get the best of anyone. I think he is the best lynch right now. The attention he has brought on himself has never been in a good light. Post 719 from cow says it all.

Vote Dynamo

[raider8169]

Everyone on the Dynamo wagon: have you EVER seen scum, particularly newbscum, just give up and resign himself to his own lynch like this? I can point to a few finished games when I've seen a townie do it (sykedoc in Mini 577, vendetta in Newbie 615, and CC09 in Mini 617 all come to mind) but never once have I seen this sort of concession come from scum.

I have not been in many games yet so I may not be the best one to answer this, however in one of my games one of the scum gave up and self voted himself for the lynch. The game was SSWIII.

[raider8169]

If you are town, it would be detrimental to your winning cause to self-hammer. Please do not self-hammer.

If I don't get lynched now (which idk how that could happen) later on (possibly in lylo) scum could use all the plausible cases against me to win, something that I think I can take care of right now.

Maybe but then we wouldnt have the all the people in the bandwagon to compare agianst during the later rounds.

[raider8169]

I dont see a real case on Netlava. It is kind of odd but with a game this size I dont see why people will not be jumpy at first. I still like my vote on Dynamo.

[raider8169]

Also, I strongly believe Netlava to have tried to bus Dynamo, and to have failed miserably. In my mind, we may have just caught two scum.

Also, EA's vote on BM seems quite OMGUS to me, and BM's play, while frustrating, seems just like Battle Mage being Battle Mage.

I feel we should lynch Dynamo today, and if he turns scum,

very seriously consider

lynching Netlava tomorrow. I am also willing to do this vice versa, but would prefer Netlava to be lynched first.

Why would you say we need to lynch Dynamo today and then say you prefer Netlava to be lynched first?

[raider8169]

Ok, I can't see us stopping a Dynamo lynch annoyingly, because some people apparently doubt his alignment. Fair enough, but guys, we have 9 days to do it, so it's still perfectly doable.

What reasons do you have for wanting to stop us from lynching Dynamo? Or atleast what are your reasons for thinking he is town and not lieing?

[raider8169]

Ok, I can't see us stopping a Dynamo lynch annoyingly, because some people apparently doubt his alignment. Fair enough, but guys, we have 9 days to do it, so it's still perfectly doable.

What reasons do you have for wanting to stop us from lynching Dynamo? Or atleast what are your reasons for thinking he is town and not lieing?

I think we've already gone over that a couple of times. Why ask these questions? You seem to be trying to look like you're contributing while in reality all you're doing is asking pointless questions. Active lurking much?

unvote, vote: raider

I would care more about this vote if it would have happened when I was active lurking. Looks to me that you are trying to toss your vote somewhere and hope it goes unnoticed. This is noted.

[raider8169]

Raider, what does korts have to gain from a vote on essentially nowhere at this point?

If he is scum then he can stay off of the mislynch. Making him seem town. Plus while having a vote somewhere else he will be overlooked in case the lynch is decided via deadline. The only thing I am pointing out is that the vote is casted close to deadline but not that close. The case is weak as I have been posting alot more then I was. If the vote came a week ago it would have been expected. There are also many others that are lurking it didnt make sense why I was picked but I think because I happen to post at the time it made all the difference.

[raider8169]

You have not supported the idea only said it. Show me where I am active lurking plus tell me why I am picked out over everyone else. Then maybe it will mean something but until then I see your actions as just trying to toss a vote out there with no meaning behind it.

[raider8169]

Sorry everyone for the quote clusters ahead of time.

This was your last post with serious content; I have to point out though that your case against Dynamo relies heavily on others' points. I realize you can't always make unique points, but this is still to be noted.

I endorsed the postings from other people while I added a little bit. You can not always have unique points and it will often be someone else's case that gets you to see their point of view. Its called a bandwagon. It happens. This might be something worth more if you called everyone else on it. I wonder why you are going after only me? Kind of strange but if I hit your radar then hope this answers that.

Your next is a single comment on self-hammering. Almost, but not quite, irrelevant.

My comment was completely relevant. If you think otherwise please explain more. He asked a question and I gave what I thought to be a good example. If you notice he then revised his thought because of my example.

Your next post is a single sentence directed at Dynamo. I don't understand this; Dynamo is basically arguing

for

his lynch, and you say this in reply, but the structure of the sentence, which implies you'd be arguing

against

Dynamo's lynch (starting with "maybe, but"), is in contradiction with the actual content, which is another point in favor of a Dynamo-lynch. Correct me if I'm wrong; this isn't a point in case against you, I would just like some clarification.

I do not want him to self vote. Later in the game all the people on the bandwagon can be used for information. If he votes himself that is one less person that would have to vote for the lynch. It gives less information for latter on. Is this the clarification you were looking for?

Your next comment is a short note on the Netlava-case and reinforcing your conviction in your vote. No serious content here.

Not all posts are going to have serious content. This one was me asking for the case on Netlava as I did not see it. Is it so wrong to ask for clarification?

Also, I strongly believe Netlava to have tried to bus Dynamo, and to have failed miserably. In my mind, we may have just caught two scum.

Also, EA's vote on BM seems quite OMGUS to me, and BM's play, while frustrating, seems just like Battle Mage being Battle Mage.

I feel we should lynch Dynamo today

, and if he turns scum,

very seriously consider

lynching Netlava tomorrow. I am also willing to do this vice versa, but

would prefer Netlava to be lynched first

.

Why would you say we need to lynch Dynamo today and then say you prefer Netlava to be lynched first?

A pointless question whose answer is in the quoted post, pretty much. Again, no serious content.

I was asking for clarification. Note the bolded parts. How can you lynch Dynamo today and prefer that Netlava be lynched first?

It seems to me you had questions for me but why would you vote first and then ask the question. Your case is empty but I will be a placeholder for your vote.

[raider8169]

Secondly, raider, did you see my post clarifying the mistype I made that you asked about? In case you missed it, it is here, at the top of this page.

Yes I got it, thank for for that. I was still useing it to explain why it was a real question and not something to just keep up with the one post a day thing.

[raider8169]

Yeah, with every post he makes I can see the "raider is active lurking"-case more. Something to keep an eye on, but again, not today.

I endorsed the postings from other people while I added a little bit. You can not always have unique points and it will often be someone else's case that gets you to see their point of view. Its called a bandwagon. It happens. This might be something worth more if you called everyone else on it. I wonder why you are going after only me? Kind of strange but if I hit your radar then hope this answers that.

Could you name the other people Korts should call on it? Or did you mean he should be after

everyone

on that bandwagon?

I mean he should be looking at everyone that does not add to the case. I dislike it when people just vote with no other reasons but I think its fine to point out the reasons you like. Not everyone is going to be able to make a case based on the same information and I dont see a point in someone just taking one persons case and changing the words around and claim it as their own case. Its just not needed.

[raider8169]

For the record I hate when people use meta for information. People can and do play differently game to game as I have and I currently am doing. Feel free to use whatever you find but I would not put everything you have into it.

[raider8169]

For the record I hate when people use meta for information. People can and do play differently game to game as I have and I currently am doing. Feel free to use whatever you find but I would not put everything you have into it.

But your playstyle here agrees with your playstyle in other games. I would understand your argument if you were playing differently in this game, but that you're playing the same, makes a pattern.

The meta I'm giving of you

supports

you anyway.

Maybe so, but it would not be supported in games I have not played the same way. If doing a meta is someones play style that is on them but I will not judge someone for a way they acted in a different game is all I am really trying to get across.

[raider8169]

Meta turning scum tells into null tells is very valid.

Can you explain how that works? I think you are saying that if someone does an action that screams scum but they do it in every game makes it a null tell.

I have an example but the game is on going.

[raider8169]

Even better, of course, would be if a few more people would vote for Dynamo so we don't have to have a deadline lynch. (He's now at L-2 if I didn't miscount.)

There are alot of people not voting I am hoping they chime in and place a vote.

[raider8169]

I dont think Dynamo made any friends self lynching. I dont understand why people feel the need for it.

[raider8169]

I agree with the netlava bandwagon. I just dont want to see the bandwagon get that large so fast. I would like to see how Netlava posts today before adding my vote.

Thus far I agree with hasdgfas. I dont think the FoS was needed but it did help get the point accross.

[raider8169]

That is what I was wondering myself Cass. Are we going to do the same thing as day one or is he trying to make it seem that way. I want to see Netlava defend himself.

[raider8169]

[quote="Korts]

I agree with the netlava bandwagon. I just dont want to see the bandwagon get that large so fast. I would like to see how Netlava posts today before adding my vote.

This has the fair aroma of opportunism; embracing the newly found suspicion of Cream while maintaining a healthy dose of support for Netlava's wagon. Also, off the top of my head, I don't remember you supporting Netlava's lynch yesterday, correct me if I'm wrong.[/quote]

You are right in that I was not a big fan of Netlava's lynch yesterday as I thought the better target was Dynamo. I do not see a better lynch for today thus far but as the day only just started I would like to see what Netlava has to say. I dont think I am being an opportunisic by saying where I stand and also adding that I wish to hear from Netlava. My vote has not been placed, had then been the case then I think you would have had a point.

[raider8169]

As someone who came pretty much out of the gate yesterday in support of a Netlava lynch, I have to agree that this wagon is moving a little too fast for my liking. I'm seeing a rather opportunistic votes from BlakAdder & perhaps StrangerCoug, and raider's post 991 (as a couple of others have also noted) really smells of scum appearing to support a wagon without committing to actually laying a vote down.

Saying I agree with the bandwagon is opportunistic? You guys throw that word around way too much and I think you guys lost the meaning behind the word. With as many people needed to lynch someone people will toss their vote on there for many different reasons.

I am pro the bandwagon but I didnt like how large it got and how fast it got. I would also like Netlava to defend himself. Failure to defend would result in my vote anything else and I would need to consider.

[raider8169]

Dammit armlx, there you go with the capital S again...

Is there some deal with the capital S that I missed before or something?

[raider8169]

@ Cream can you explain why ne is in an indefensible position? I dont understand.

[raider8169]

Netlava's play is scummy, and everyone has been defending it by saying its too scummy to be scum, which is just bull shit.

I would normally agree with you but after dynamo I think this may be along the same lines and he might just turn up town.

[raider8169]

I would normally agree with you but after dynamo I think this may be along the same lines and he might just turn up town.

That's just dumb.

I think you just have it in for me today...

Anyways, how is it dumb. His actions have been stupid and though he is not making any real attempts to defend himself, or atleast from my opinion. I dont see a real difference between Netlava's case and the case agianst dynamo.

By no means does this means Netlava is cleared or anything like that but I am trying to make sure there is a difference and that Netlava isnt todays lynch because nothing better has been looked at.

[raider8169]

Its an extension of the "too scummy to be scum" argument, which is just crap and WIFOM.

I want to agree with this. I am just not convinced enough to vote Netlava right now.

[raider8169]

Just because you mislynched once doesn't mean you should WIFOM yourself out of every lynch for the rest of the game, my friend.

I agree, but I dont see us in any rush at the moment and I would like to see Netlava post more. The lack of posting is making me lean closer and closer to adding my vote.

[raider8169]

Whatever. Vote stands.

So now you're OMGUS'ing Korts? Because if he's not attacking you for the reason you voted him for, why are you voting?

FoS: SC

How am I OMGUS'ing Korts when 1.) he hasn't voted me once this game and 2.) his current case on me wouldn't exist if I hadn't butted in supporting Skruff's analogy?

I was wondering the same thing.

[raider8169]

SC: he doesn't have to vote you for you to OMGUS him. It's not that you're voting for him, because voting for him at the time you did was for a reason that he has since refuted. Because you're still voting him, it looks to me like it's just because he's gotten on your case.

I was always under the impression that an OMGUS vote only works if the person being OMGUS voted first. Having a case but not voting the person makes the OMGUS voided. Granted its just a term and the meaning behind the case and SC voting is what matters.

[raider8169]

Sorry, haven't been posting (skool has just started) and of course, since the wagon is on me makes me not feel like wanting to post

Strengthen up, when there's a wagon on me, that makes me want to post more!

I agree with this, you should be posting alot more trying to explain yourself and convince everyone that you should not be today's lynch.

I was hoping for more but for the time being a vote will have to do.

Vote Netlava

[raider8169]

I think you're right, Skruffs. Based on that connection alone, SC is more likely out of the two of you to be scum. So please address the points I made against the analogy and I can get on with voting SC. It may not be all that relevant to scumhunting, but the fact that you failed to do so or even mention it when I asked you multiple times makes me think I may be onto something here.

You think SC is more likely to be scum then Netlava?

[raider8169]

I'm with Korts and Hascow here. However, I don't quite feel comfortable voting either of them just off of this.

What? You agree with us, therefore you're considering voting us? How does that make sense?

I think BA mistyped. That is too off to be right.

[raider8169]

It looks like we have 14 people that are still in this game. With this many people we would all have to agree on someone in order to make a lynch.

I dont really have anything to say on the new cases as I dont see what they see and nothing has stood out to me.

Netlava is posting more which is good but nothing to make me not happy with a lynch there.

[raider8169]

Sorry, haven't been posting (skool has just started) and of course, since the wagon is on me makes me not feel like wanting to post

Strengthen up, when there's a wagon on me, that makes me want to post more!

I agree with this, you should be posting alot more trying to explain yourself and convince everyone that you should not be today's lynch.

I was hoping for more but for the time being a vote will have to do.

Vote Netlava

Contradiction here with your last post.
Either you were voting him purely because he wasn't posting enough or you were actually suspicious of him.

I did not contradicted myself. I was suspicious from the start. My reason for not voting was because I was worried that is would be the same as a dynamo lynch. The difference between the 2 is how they are defending themselves. Netlava was not even making a real attempt to IMO. Netlava is doing better however I am not ready to unvote and the posts have not swayed me one way or the other.

[raider8169]

I'm not sure if you're reading the game, but I'm sure that will help.

I have been reading. Did I miss the post where you gave reasons for everything you said?

[raider8169]

Im here but at the moment I have nothing to add. The Cass case is something but I dont have an opinion yet.

[raider8169]

If Netlava is lynched and flips scum...

Do you have a reason to think that Netlava will not turn scum? I think he is scum still so I am very interested in a response.

[raider8169]

Now, you know I said a while back that I was scanning the Dynamo and Netlava wagons for clues. I think I've got a good one here.

I dont see a real case on Netlava. It is kind of odd but with a game this size I dont see why people will not be jumpy at first. I still like my vote on Dynamo.

By this point, Netlava had of course already made

that

post, which as far as I can see, is the center of the entire case on him. Where did the turning point come when it all of a sudden became a 'real' case?

I've had a quick skim-through raider's posts since and when the Netlava bandwagon formed, he seemed to magically change his mind here.

I agree with the netlava bandwagon. I just dont want to see the bandwagon get that large so fast. I would like to see how Netlava posts today before adding my vote.

Thus far I agree with hasdgfas. I dont think the FoS was needed but it did help get the point accross.

There was a mention of lack of posting which caused him to put a vote on, but that wasn't what magically made the case a 'real' one. That's far worse and more opportunistic than many of the other Dynamo wagonner's who conceded that Netlava was worth a look the following day.

I'm going to have a closer look at Raider I think, I haven't really enjoyed his play anyway (his wishy-washiness about joining the Netlava wagon for example).

I assume you found these posts by just looking through all the posts I have said. Try reading them along with everyone elses they will make more sense. I will sum it up though.

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it. I wanted to hear Netlava's response. I was never happy with his responses. Hence my vote. I was never wish washy. I waited so long to add my vote because of the concern about what happen to dynamo.

[raider8169]

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it.

I dont see a real case on Netlava.

Just saying.

I'm back. And loving this. armlx is a pro.

No that isnt a pro, that is more of a newbie type post. He is trying to take my words out of context. Just pointing out 2 posts with nothing else can make anyone sound bad. For example:

I don't think nhat is scummy at this point, he's just extremely wrong.

Vote nhat

Just saying...

Read my posts and the posts along with it, then make something out of it.

I will still explain it though.

If you recall when I said I dont see the case. That means I didnt understand was the fuss was about. It was explained and then I agreed with it. Not seeing a case one someone means just that. If I didnt agree with the case I would have said I dont agree with it. Just because I didnt catch on as fast as other people did means nothing.

[raider8169]

He is trying to take my words out of context.

What context were they supposed to be in?

Read the thread.

[raider8169]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

So, I gotta ask. Why are you voting me?

[raider8169]

If you recall when I said I dont see the case. That means I didnt understand was the fuss was about. It was explained and then I agreed with it. Not seeing a case one someone means just that. If I didnt agree with the case I would have said I dont agree with it. Just because I didnt catch on as fast as other people did means nothing.

It really does not look like that to me. I don't know anyone who dismisses cases that they don't understand as not 'real'. I myself, dismiss cases which I think have poor justification as not real. And speaking of poor justification!

This is a good point. All I can really say is that my intention behind it was that I did not see the case. For me not seeing the case makes the case not real but that how I look at it. I can understand how someone else can see that and think I mean that there is no case. They are 2 different things and can be interperated 2 different ways. Unless that is just my way of looking at it.

[raider8169]

Raider, your not seeing the case statement was AFTER the major scummy post netlava made, am I right?

If I am mistaken, please correct me.

The scummy statement is what I am talking about. I didnt see it as scummy until someone explained it. Netlava makes those types of posts all the time so I didnt look into it as much as I should have.

[raider8169]

Oh, one other thing about raider. If he did indeed misspeak, it would have been smarter of him to simply come clean and admit it right off the bat. By flatout denying it he's dug himself into a hole from which the only possible escape is trying to HUGELY twist his words. Something that isn't at all believable, I'm afraid.

I didnt misspeak. It was what I meant to say only it is interpreted differently then what it was meant to be.

[raider8169]

You obviously didn't read my post properly. You missed this bit:

By flatout denying it he's dug himself into a hole from which the only possible escape is trying to HUGELY twist his words. Something that isn't at all believable, I'm afraid.

I saw it. Doesnt change what happened though. You can always make up a clause saying if I do this it is not believable. If you choose not to believe it that is up to you. Just dont try to pawn it off as bad play on my part when instead of asking for clarification you assume the worse.

[raider8169]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

So, I gotta ask. Why are you voting me?

Armlx noted a seemingly valid inconsistency in your comments, and your defence was 'read the thread'. That's a lazy response, and until you defend yourself properly, i'm happy to vote for you.

BM

I did explain myself in my previous posts. Armlx just posted with a just saying, I consider that lazy. What is also lazy is when people dont read the thread and then say I didnt respond. If there are still questions after that then by all means ask away.

[raider8169]

Raider: I pointed out a contradiction. Nothing else really needed to be said. You, on the other hand, were in the position of defending yourself. More did need to be said.

What about everything that happened in between the posts though?

First post was on Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:52 pm

Second one on Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:00 am

With many posts inbetween to include a night. You took what I said out of context no question about it.

[raider8169]

Also, im still happy with my vote after reading Raider's posts in isolation. I cant see what changed in the space of 5 days and a night phase that would make him completely change tack regarding Netlava.

It was closer to 14 days. You would have to read everything in between the posts in order to see what made me change my mind. Feel free to do that when you have some time. I am not sure how well you have been keeping up with the game as you were gone for a while.

[raider8169]

Raider, the issue at hand is nothing really changed about the Netlava case in between those 2 times except maybe the info of Dynamo's alignment.

Im not going to do a quote trail as I think it would take forever but feel free to go back and look at these posts. What you say if full of crap. Also if you only read one post read 903. I said in that post that I did not see the case. That alone should have cleared everything up before hand.

Starts at post 849 (page 34). After that read the following posts: 854, 903, 926, 985, 991, 1019, 1022, 1023,

Minor posts that comment on the idea of a Netlava lynch: 855,857,859,871,877,878, 1001, 1003, 1007, 1021

That was all just through page 42. That should be enough for everyone to understand my initial thought, to seeing the case and then agreeing with it. I still waited a while to vote because on top of everything else I wanted to see Netlava post more before adding my vote. A real attempt to defend didnt happen until after my vote but it did not convince me to change.

[raider8169]

Even if it was wrong, voting without giving a reason is not scummy.

Why not?

I thought it was for a while as well, but there could be many reasons for a vote without stating it right away. Let me just name a couple:
1) You're a cop with a guilty, but don't want to come right out and say that
2) You're suspicious of someone and want to see their reactions to a strange move, such as voting without giving a reason.

In both of those situations, I wouldn't consider voting without stating a reason to be scummy.
99% of the time there is a reason, even if it isn't explicitly stated.

Also, by 'wrong', I meant SC being wrong about BM not giving a reason. Not the best word choice there.

It still seems like it makes an easy place for scum to place a vote and blame it on one of those reasons to make them still seem town. If someone doesnt say why then someone, not always the person being voted for, will ask why. The best thing the voter can be hoping for would be an over exaggerated OMGUS vote. It just seems to be that it can give a free pass or a home for their vote.

If BM really wanted to end the day it would have been faster to add to a bandwagon instead of starting a new one. The vote also seems kind of random simply because I was the person being looked at when he posted. Had someone else been looked at then he could have jumped that way just the same.

[raider8169]

Post in question: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:52 pm
Day end un Sep 14, 2008 11:04 am
Day 2 start Sun Sep 21, 2008 10:17 am
Other post in question Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:00 am

I should add that I voted on Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:46 pm

So from 8 Sept to 14 Sept is over 5 days. Then it was still almost another day before I only said I agree with the case.

You said I lied about something, what was that?

[raider8169]

So from 8 Sept to 14 Sept is over 5 days. Then it was still almost another day before I only said I agree with the case.

So you were both wrong? Definitely not 14 days.

I was counting the night as days. It is something I didnt think to take out. The 8th to the 22nd is still 14 days though.

[raider8169]

Are you really quibbling over 1 day?
Let's get this straight. I claim you changed your mind within a 5 day time window. You claimed it was 14 days? And it turned out to be 6 days.

BM - 5
Raider - 14
Actual Answer - 6

Who is more guilty of lying?

My vote stands. And i'm really at a loss as to why you aren't dead yet. Obviously some people aren't really following this conversation.

BM

This conversation is retarded. Why are are pushing it is beyond me. I am still right with 14 days mind you. I just included the night in the time frame.

Why people have not joined with you is because you have still yet to show anything. People are allowed to change their mind once they are informed of more information then when they started.

[raider8169]

The BM-Raider argument is dumb. Regardless of how many RL days it was, it looks like an opportunistic flip flop to me.

Show me the flip flop part. You said it is dumb yet are still commenting on it. Its simple show me how I flip flopped.

[raider8169]

Show me the flip flop part. You said it is dumb yet are still commenting on it. Its simple show me how I flip flopped.

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it.

I dont see a real case on Netlava.

Just saying.

With no relevant info in the middle.

Raider, the issue at hand is nothing really changed about the Netlava case in between those 2 times except maybe the info of Dynamo's alignment.

Im not going to do a quote trail as I think it would take forever but feel free to go back and look at these posts. What you say if full of crap. Also if you only read one post read 903. I said in that post that I did not see the case. That alone should have cleared everything up before hand.

Starts at post 849 (page 34). After that read the following posts: 854, 903, 926, 985, 991, 1019, 1022, 1023,

Minor posts that comment on the idea of a Netlava lynch: 855,857,859,871,877,878, 1001, 1003, 1007, 1021

That was all just through page 42. That should be enough for everyone to understand my initial thought, to seeing the case and then agreeing with it. I still waited a while to vote because on top of everything else I wanted to see Netlava post more before adding my vote. A real attempt to defend didnt happen until after my vote but it did not convince me to change.

Did you miss all this or something?

It wouldnt be circular if my posts didnt get ignored.

Armlx just can not admit when he is wrong.

[raider8169]

How many times do I need to say that is not flipping? Not seeing a real case is me not understanding the case as I have said I think 3 times now. Plus I said that before you even called me out on it. Your case is just full of fail and yet you will not listen to reason.

All you are doing is repeating yourself and I defending everything. If you chose to ignore then there is nothing I can say or do about it. Either way until you come up with something new or listen to what I have been saying I am done with this.

[raider8169]

Part of post 903

Your next comment is a short note on the Netlava-case and reinforcing your conviction in your vote. No serious content here.

Not all posts are going to have serious content. This one was me asking for the case on Netlava as I did not see it. Is it so wrong to ask for clarification?

If this is not understood or if you think this is not directly related the initial post then read post 902 that should clear it up.

[raider8169]

How many times do I need to say that is not flipping? Not seeing a real case is me not understanding the case as I have said I think 3 times now.

Raider, I gave you multiple chances to honourably reverse your rather ludicrous expectation that people believe this crap. I don't know whether it's because you don't want to admit you're lying or that you actually think you stand a decent chance of getting anyone to buy it, but either way it's really making me feel like switching my vote to you.

I am not lying. I have no problem admitting to when I am wrong. I do it alot in mafia. Both your reasons were wrong. It is what happen if people cant accept it then it is no longer my problem. I will be lynched and they will have to deal with the mislynch.

Secondly I never said I didnt agree with the case, I said I didnt understand the case. Big difference.

@Netlava, first on my list is you. Thats obvs though, next is now SC for his opportunistic vote. Third is BM so making a mountain out of a mole hill and last is Armlx for just not reading. OMGUS much, maybe, maybe not you asked I answered.

[raider8169]

@Netlava, first on my list is you. Thats obvs though, next is now SC for his opportunistic vote.

I gave a warning that I'd consider voting you if the thing with you and Battle Mage wasn't just semantics. You originally said you were OK with his lynch, then you claim not to understand his case, and now, for some reason or other, he's your #1 suspect. How does that work?

Some consideration? You voted based off of the same information that was already posted a few before yours and then by reposting the same information you voted.

Show me where I said I was ok with his lynch THEN said I didnt understand. Post numbers as well.

[raider8169]

@SC The posts would have to be before 849 for it to hold any ground.

[raider8169]

Raider, what did you not understand about my lynch?

Oh yeah, raider, can you answer this?

I didnt understand what was scummy about your post if I remember correctly. The first read through I must not have read it well enough or something. After people were posting about it and in their posts explained why it was scummy I understood.

[raider8169]

Sorry about my lack of posting today. I am in the middle of doing my final project and not sure how much time I will have extra until next Monday. I will try to post but if anyone asked me anything please repost it on Monday. Sorry everyone.

[raider8169]

Hey everyone, Im back. Netlava you asked me a question but I need to find it first. Once I do I will answer as soon as I can.

[raider8169]

Yeah, 2 groups of 4 + an Sk and Vig seems most realistic here SC.

How did you come to that conclusion?

Also

Mod

I will be gone starting tomorrow until Friday

[raider8169]

How did you come to that conclusion?

Its a pretty standard set up. Scum group A, Scum group B, SK is very repeatable, and the fact there's not a lot of room for a 3rd and the game size implies there's a vig.

Do you have a different idea?

Not at all. I was just wondering as I had no clue on the set up.

[raider8169]

Im back, missed quite a bit it seems.

One thing that doesn't make sense to me is why would scum have a doctor?

[raider8169]

I leave for a couple days and SC has 4 votes on him. I will read more and catch up soon.

[raider8169]

Raider8169's post, ie "I was gone a few days and now sc is up to four votes", also strikes me as odd; if I am not mistaken, raider pushed the netlava lynch over the sc lynch yesterday, which cream147 questioned him about.
Where do you stand on SC, raider?

I do not like what he said, but I can see why he said it. There is no reason for him to reveal his role unless he was about to be lynched. The way he is going about it seem aggressive to me. Could be scum could be town. If he does turn up scum I can see the main people leading this as part of the opposing scum team. Will have to look into this. Not sure if I want to be part of the lynch though.

[raider8169]

Good distancing there, but you didn't actually weigh in on SC, himself, rather the people pushing against him.

The first half was me weighing in on SC. I love how you jump that I am distancing myself from him when I simply do not simply agree with someone on this case.

Are the people not voting SC distancing themselves from him too?

[raider8169]

I guess it should say I do not like how he said it. It seemed aggressive like a frustrated townie not wanting to have to claim for no reason. As scum it would be the backed into the corner lashing out.

Those are my opinions. I have not sided completely one way or the other as I could see both outcomes. Why are you trying to push this agianst me so much?

[raider8169]

I guess it should say I do not like how he said it. It seemed aggressive like a frustrated townie not wanting to have to claim for no reason. As scum it would be the backed into the corner lashing out.

Those are my opinions. I have not sided completely one way or the other as I could see both outcomes. Why are you trying to push this agianst me so much?

Because it looks like you are trying to cover your ass too much.

That is the way I see it.

Not in the least. Reguardless you would think that no matter what I said simply because I do not agree with you. So are you a survivor?

[raider8169]

Not in the least. Reguardless you would think that no matter what I said simply because I do not agree with you. So are you a survivor?

The answer to your question: No.

And regardless if I will disagree with your actual opinion or not does not change the fact that what you posted was not thoughts at all. You posted the obvious "He could be this or that." We all know that someone could be a good lynch or a bad lynch in the end.

So, what I would like to see are your actual thoughts/instincts, not a bunch of neutral talk to keep under the radar.

If you were a survivor would you have said yes? Can not say I would but I do not really understand what the role is so it is hard to say.

The obvious thoughts are my opinion right now. I do atleast understand what you are saying now. They are generic thoughts and thought SC is the best lynch right now it doesnt mean I want SC lynched so quickly. The problem with this game is that not many bandwagons have started that did not end in a lynch. Right now I have tunnel vison on someone else without a real case to back it up. This could be part of it.

[raider8169]

I am in support of an SC lynch, however I am not ready for this day to end yet.

SC who do you see as scum in this game?

[raider8169]

I am in support of an SC lynch, however I am not ready for this day to end yet.

What reasoning do you have to stand by the SC lynch?

Outside of the stuff he said about claiming and then ended up claiming nothing is kind of odd. Not odd enough for me to vote him yet but at the moment there is nothing holding back from lynching him.

Im still looking at Armlx but it appears he was gone. Like someone else I must have missed it.

Either way I do not want this day to end too quickly. I atleast would like to hear from SC and find out his thoughts if he has any.

[raider8169]

I dig skruffs and am cool with my SC vote.

Not liking raider.

What are you not liking about me?

[raider8169]

I dig skruffs and am cool with my SC vote.

Not liking raider.

What are you not liking about me?

I don't like the fact that you are avoiding the SC lynch while you don't suspect anyone one yourself. I don't like the fact that the only vote you cast the entire game was on Netlava.

In fact if I'm alive tomorrow, I'm bringing the Inquisition down your ass.

So you do not like be because I do not just toss my vote around and that I only suspected Net and Dynamo while I did vote for them and have said that I dislike Armlx? Noted, I will be waiting for your inquisition.

[raider8169]

Before the hammer is dropped I would like to hear from SC again. After that if no one else drops the hammer I will do it.

[raider8169]

Citizen Karne

: When someone asks that the hammer be postponed until someone (the lynched) speaks, it is incredibly bad form to hammer that person. It makes you look like you are trying to preemptively silence someone. You are making a judgement call that affects everyone else in the game by saying "I don't think we need to hear from SC again".

I asked him to hammer. Hence i expect you to give me similar attention as you give him. In fact, anyone who wants to attack Citizen Karne for the hammer, can go through me. It's not like he did anything that i wouldnt have done in his position.

BM

Same question then goes to you, why would you not let the person being lynched give his last thoughts on the game so when the person flips we can either can useless information if scum or a town perspective if town?

[raider8169]

So Armlx was scum. There was a reason after all as to why I didnt like him.

[raider8169]

awaits another bright idea from bm

What do you mean by this?

BM

when i replaced in i read the thread i agreed most with his reasoning throughoutg the game,,
So i followed BM's vote like and over eager lapdog,

but now i supposed there isn't any room left on BM's coattails, perhaps i need to think for myself now,,, damn it

You are aware there are 2 scum groups. BM can be hunting the other scum group and all this time you think you are following a townie but BM can turn up scum. Please keep this in mind. So far I think BM to be town however I just finished a game where the more pro-town person was scum and he hunted the other scum group the entire game.

[raider8169]

Also I disagree with not saying someone strikes you as scummy going into the night phase if it fits your play style and you have a REALLY strong suspicion about it. However, if your playstyle is lurking, it doesn't fit. Saying you intend to vote for someone the next day phase off of an early hammer though is a bit much.

I agree with you. With BA intending to vote someone and then changing his mind I would think he would post something saying that instead of just changing and hoping people would ignore it.

BA can you go into more details on what changed your mind?

[raider8169]

I didn't really feel the need to comment on such a bad case, but hear you go.
Your case on me is nothing but misinterpreting my words. By saying that I intended to vote Karne the next day, I was in no way implying that I knew that I would live to the next day. And even so, that would be a stupid move by the scum as well, as we have now confirmed that there are multiple killing groups.

We confirmed multiple killing groups night one with all the kills and then confirmed to scum groups night 2. I do not see how that fits in to your point.

[raider8169]

Still, I do like raider and little to nothing has changed since the last time I posted about him.

Raider is scummy, so I'm still watching him, but Tom has made a few too many slips for my liking.

What has changed within your last couple of posts to change your opinion of me?

[raider8169]

Vote BA

I do not see how you could vote someone to L-1 when you do not even think they are scummy.

[raider8169]

I said that I was fence-sitting at the time. There's a difference.

So you would still vote someone when you are unsure? How that that make any more sense?

[raider8169]

My question and anyone can feel free to answer, wouldnt the doc claim be the safe claim if one was to make it up? Also if someone was the doctor wouldnt it be wiser to claim at L-2 to make sure everyone had enough time to unvote?

As I too do not wish to lynch a doctor

Unvote

[raider8169]

personally if i were a doc i would never claim it, i might claim watcher/tracker something anything but doc,,,

to me claiming doc=scum fishing for real doc but thats just me

That is what I normally think as well however in a game this size there could be more then one doctor.

[raider8169]

personally if i were a doc i would never claim it, i might claim watcher/tracker something anything but doc,,,

to me claiming doc=scum fishing for real doc but thats just me

It depends on the situation. But the real reason i'm inclined to believe Blakadder, is that during the period last night in which we were both online, he said he asked the Mod a question, and got a response within about 5 minutes. Sure enough, the Mod had just come back online after an hour absence.
If Blakadder is scum, then he has greater intelligence than i creditted him for. But given how capable a mafia player i do think he is, i dont think he could have made that up. So i'm happy to accept the mod confirmation of his role for the moment.

BM

I noticed this as well. I do not see how someone as scum could have planned something like that out. Maybe right after the mods post sure but before not so much. I can not use that alone to confirm doctor or confirm town but defenatly not today's lynch.

[raider8169]

The lurking on K7's part doesn't concern me. The fact that he comes out of nowhere and puts BA at L-2 for a pretty weak reason does. The vote backed up with the reason of "what BM said" just doesn't sit well with me. He conviently comes out of lurking to put BA at L-2 and then makes the reason that BM has a good case. Something just doesn't seem right about that.

Vote: killa seven

That said, springlullaby's uncooperativeness is getting really annoying.

The lurking is the reason why BM wants to lynch him. You want to lynch him because of putting BA at L-2. I no longer think of this as a LAL case as Caboose tried to make reason to it. I would like to hear from K7 before I even think about adding my vote to the mix.

[raider8169]

The lurking on K7's part doesn't concern me. The fact that he comes out of nowhere and puts BA at L-2 for a pretty weak reason does. The vote backed up with the reason of "what BM said" just doesn't sit well with me. He conviently comes out of lurking to put BA at L-2 and then makes the reason that BM has a good case. Something just doesn't seem right about that.

Vote: killa seven

That said, springlullaby's uncooperativeness is getting really annoying.

The lurking is the reason why BM wants to lynch him. You want to lynch him because of putting BA at L-2. I no longer think of this as a LAL case as Caboose tried to make reason to it. I would like to hear from K7 before I even think about adding my vote to the mix.

why was putting BA at -2 scummy?

BM

I dont think putting BA at L-2 is any bit scummy. That was just cabooses reason for voting K7.

[raider8169]

why are you considering 'adding your vote to the mix' then?

BM

Right now I am not adding my vote to the mix. I would like a real reason for lynch someone. I guess I just have not been around long enough to lynch all lurkers yet.

[raider8169]

do you think that reason will come directly from K7?

BM

Good point, I have no real way to defend my position other then it just doesnt seem right that he is the only person worthy of a lynch right now. I assume others feel the same way otherwise they would have add their votes as well.

[raider8169]

Im still here, I do not like the idea of killing K7 because of his activity level. We have others doing the same. How is K7 any better of a lynch then the rest of them?

[raider8169]

The answer to all the questions ask to me is, I changed my mind. No you cannot know why.

Would have been more helpful to know what questions you are referring to so I know what questions you are not being helpful in answering.

[raider8169]

Im going on vacation.. please dont replace.

you have nothing to say about the people voting you?

[raider8169]

Leave me alone.

Vote spring

Why are you playing if you are not going to answer questions and are asking everyone to leave you alone?

[raider8169]

I am playing, and I'm asking people to leave me alone because it's in town's interest.

Care to explain how it is in towns interest?

[raider8169]

Unvote

Seems we know a handful of roles now but they could have the same role and just be mafia.

[raider8169]

today. Not all that long ago, given that i still remembered it, and was able to find it easily. I was hoping Blakadder-Doc could confirm himself by protecting me, and my life would be guaranteed.

BM

I assume your sanity is confirmed?

[raider8169]

BM,

Are you saying that there is only one of each of those types of roles?

[raider8169]

Mod

My wife is giving birth in a few hours so I will be gone for a couple days.

[raider8169]

Hey everyone, my wife is still in the hospital and we should be back home on Thursday. I hope to catch up by Friday.

[raider8169]

Wife and I are back from the hospital, baby is doing good just not getting much sleep.

@BM is there a reason you are not telling us your results?

[raider8169]

I am still here, sorry I am not posting how I would like. Baby is taking up much of my time but I will catch up tomorrow.

[raider8169]

I don't like BM's plan and persistence that the plan be followed even though obv. flaws are being pointed out. I don't like that he claims under no pressure but offers no scum to lynch or townies to confirm (other than Skruffs and only because SL saw him visit skruffs). I don't like that BM argues against the mafia poisoner role and uses Skruffs being alive as an excuse when there is no proof that the mafia poisoners aren't as they have been thought to be by others and points out he + arm "concluded" that there are no such things or that they aren't anti-town roles or that they can't be in this game because they've never seen them on MS.Net. Sorry but that logic is horseshit and relies on outguess the mod via what's been done/common on MS.net as its focal point. Craplogic.

Also, Arm was scum. I don't think I'd trust him on that point, you know? Mafia poisoners could be very good for mafias to have in games with pro-town tracker/watcher roles if they don't know what's going on and I think we can see why.

The plan was only a plan as those were the claimed roles. I am assuming at least one of them is scum. BM claimed when there was no pressure and bread crumbed it too. Shouldn't that mean he is more likely to tell the truth? Of course I do find it really odd why he has not claimed his results yet.

[raider8169]

I fail to see how breadcrumbing makes something more true than not.

Case in point: I breadcrumbed Mikey once in a TMNT game and I was Slasher or whatever the evil mutant turtle's name was.

Besides, BM's supposed "breadcrumb" was really nothing toward the cop role if you're talking about where he said to BA to "protect someone you think is pro-town ."

This is true, just wondering what he would have to gain my claiming when it was not needed.

[raider8169]

So as it is right now I think our only option that we actually can lynch is SL.

Ridiculous. I don't want to lynch SL right now.

Sad isnt it. SL's only votes are from people who have not posted in a while. Most of the lynches and night kills have been agianst some of the more active players and that is just hurting the game right now.

[raider8169]

I do not recall reading a case on BM. Can someone point me to it?

[raider8169]

I do not recall reading a case on BM. Can someone point me to it?

Read through the last two pages or so where the discussion is stirred up over the flaws and danger of going with the plan BM proposed.

I do not know how you could have missed it... Unless you were trying to.

I was thinking there may have been a cut and dry case laid out that summed up everything that I may have missed. I was hoping it would be something more then the plan. Plans are not always perfect and saying them in front of everyone allows for discussion of the plan and for someone else to see if there is a hole in the plan. Not a scum tell by itself in my opinion. That is why I was wondering if there was more to it.

[raider8169]

so i take it thats not the proper gambit to run in large games such as this??

When would it be the proper gambit to run in any game?

[raider8169]

I think it is possible the the poisoner is town as it would be harder to pick your kills and you would need to plan things out more. However, in the end I would have to think they are scum simply because they can kill people even after they are killed.

Why does this matter though? We are looking for scum not the poisoner.

[raider8169]

Blackadder's Christmas Carol came on today and will be on again tomorrow on BBC America.

What are you talking about?

[raider8169]

so ba isn't strung up at this point why??

I do not think killing ba is the best choice right now. If he is a doctor he will not live through the night anyways and if he is alive tomorrow then we can relook at it.

I am not understanding the case on Tom yet but I have not been able to dig through and find everything yet.

[raider8169]

If someone is neutral wouldn't they just need to be alive at the end to win? I stilll do not see why figuring out if the poisoner role is scum, town or even neutral. Our focus is to find the scum and I think all this extra stuff is taking away from that or trying to change the focus.

[raider8169]

Sorry the holidays have been too much for me. I will update in this game most likely tomorrow.

[raider8169]

why else would you be willing to lynch a claimed cop? especially if there are no counter claims?

I have not decided how I stand yet but I see this as a claimed cop who does not wish to disclose his investigations is the same as claiming a vanilla townie.

[raider8169]

i doubt it

doc is a far easier claim to be faked as far as scum fake claims goes.

i am just not interested in having a claimed power role lynched ( accept for ba) and with the tracker/watcher people out there its not that hard of a claim to fake,

plus since i assume he won't be protected tonite since ba doesn't believe his claim he is a likely scum target anyway


so rather than have the town lose their cop i'd rather have them lynch me.

why are you so excited to see him lynched??

How would the town benifit from this?

We lynch you.
1. You are vanilla town, BM could still be scum.
2. You are scum, BM is almost guaranteed to be scum.

We lynch BM.
1. He is scum, lynch you next
2. He is town, you stand a chance to live.

Am I missing something?

[raider8169]

[quote="tubby216"]wich could mean he diddn't find out anything new( i e all the people he has investigated have been either nk'd or lynched./quote]

If this was the case there would be no reason to not say the results? This just adds doubt to the claim itself. Which is one of my problems, I do not understand what town or even BM would have to gain by doing that.

[raider8169]

No poisoning on N1, poisoning N2, N3, falls in line with the delayed kill.

As there were two posion kills on night 2 and one on night three this seems to fall more in line with maybe having two people as a two shot poisoner or something. I still fail to see why any of this really matters.

[raider8169]

No poisoning on N1, poisoning N2, N3, falls in line with the delayed kill.

As there were two posion kills on night 2 and one on night three this seems to fall more in line with maybe having two people as a two shot poisoner or something. I still fail to see why any of this really matters.

Do I need to do my Cool Hand Luke?

That depends on what your "Cool Hand Luke" is.

[raider8169]

The most famous line from the movie.

"What we have here is a failure to communicate."

You've never seen Cool Hand Luke?

At any rate, I've explained plenty of times, about as clearly as I can, why it matters.

If we're dealing with a delayed kill poisoner and Skruffs dies N4 of poisoning, we'll have the Porto kill narrowed down to BM and Caboose because they both targeted Skruffs last night. You dig?

I do understand this, the thing I have about it is that we do not know if those roles are scum. IF they are town we could be hunting one of our own. Granted if this was the case they should speak up but even if they do there is no telling if they are scum or town.

As far as your other question its very possible. I am not sure and I do not think there is a way to be sure outside of lynching them. Either way its a guessing game at that point and not sure if that would help or hurt town.

[raider8169]

It's pretty much narrowed down to poisoning as the only possible kill for Portugal. So unless you think Portuguese Mafia means town then... yeah.

This is assuming you believe that the poisoners are only scum. I am keeping an open mind until I have something solid. Atleast I understand why it has been a topic of conversation but I still think that we find the scum problem solved. If you find the poisoner you still have to decide if the role is town or scum and that may have nothing to do with the person who has the role, I am not a fan of that.

If Caboose's claim of Firefighter is true then Arsonist is a neutral because those kinds of pairings tend to only go with SK variations. If either BM or Caboose had a kill and were fakeclaiming, it would have to be a poisoner because SL saw them both target Skruffs and all deaths last night were people other than Skruffs.

Why would the arsonist be neutral and not town or scum? Pairing only go with SK variations doesnt make sense to me.

So if the Arsonist was scum, Caboose would have to be fakeclaiming, and I can't see someone with a pro-town power role fake claiming another pro-town power role. But we'd also know he's not the arsonist because the arsonist killed someone Caboose didn't target. He also can't be the drowner or dismemberer for that same reason.

So I think the logical thing is to believe Caboose's roleclaim and accept the arsonist as an independent SK variation.

Portugal has been killed via drowning and dismemberment so we know they don't do either of those because why would they kill their own?

This leaves only poisoning as a possible kill for Portugal.

This sort of make sense but it seems to be stretching to me. Maybe its just me who knows, or maybe I am the only person willing to say something.

The fact that you continue to fight this and say it doesn't matter (despite me pointing out time and time again how a delayed kill will affect the way trackers/watchers interpret their results) really worries me.

This brings up a point I never caught if said before. A delayed kill would affect the way trackers and watchers interpret their results. Of course this is still assuming that the poisoner, if there is one, has a delayed kill. I guess it makes more sense to just say a role that kills using poison but then you would still have to believe that the kills are delayed.

Why do you still think that the portuguese kill is cremation over poisoning despite there being more reason to suspect poisoning instead of cremation?

I have never said that or thought that. I cant seem to piece everything together like other people have. So I am sort of clueless but slowing catching on. If this question was directed at someone else you should specify who.

Why do you think it doesn't matter if a delayed kill will affect how watchers and trackers are influenced by their results?

This is something I never thought of before as I said above. I agree this will affect the results however we will not know anything until tomorrow.

Why do you think it's not pro-town to look for a scum poisoner?

A scum poisoner, no. A poisoner in general yes because it could be town. I guess it matters on if you think the poisoner is only possibly scum. My thought is if we just find scum it doesn't matter their role as long as they are scum.

You have no argument that the poisoner is pro-town. You've presented nothing on your own. Neither has Tubs. BM's arguments have been torn to the ground and proved wrong. Yet the three of you still try to maintain a falsehood. Why?

Your right I have no argument that the poisoner is town, given what I have read, I do not feel that makes the poisoner guaranteed scum yet. There is still much unknown information and I think there is a lot of stretching going on. The reason I have been saying things is that I am trying to understand. If I do not speak up I will just stay in the dark while everyone else moves on.

[raider8169]

@EGL,

For the records I do not skim, however I do miss things. It happens get over it.

Why is the case stretching? Because you are assuming too many thing. One that the poisoner is scum, two that the poisoner has a delayed kill, three that anything you do right now will change anything if the poisoner has a delayed kill, four you assume them to be lying about their claim, five you assume that scruffs is about to die. I am sure there are more but you see my point.

Keeping an open mind means that I am not excluding an idea. You have already set in stone that they are scum, I have not. I am reading your reasoning and I am still not convinced. We will gather more information tomorrow about this and then I should feel better about acting on it.

Also, what do you think this is? We're trying to decide now if it's town or scum and let me tell you - it seems quite obvious to me to be scum. This said, say there IS one on each side. Finding two poisoners still narrows down Porto scum to two people, doesn't it? If I'm right, then isn't this a much more efficient way of finding the Porto scum?

Thats fine you can decide and so can I. You made you mind up, I have not. Saying there is one on each side does not narrow it down as if we lynched the town version first that just leaves alot of dead townies. It might be worth it if we can lynch the scum one first however that would still leave a lot of dead townies as soon as their is a mislynch. Is the risk acceptable? To me not at the moment. If you are right then good for you however what is the chance of that? How do I know you are not scum trying to use the town to find the other scum group or just take out some townies?

Oh yeah, you said I was skimming, please show me where you have said that "countless times".

I have also never said that poisoners to be pro-town. I have said it is possible but never said it is true. Please show me where I have.

Also you say how I am following BM, I have never said that nor have I done that. I am not tubby.

I am asking for clarification hense why we are going back and forth. You just have not convinced me is all. Plus you making up things trying to say I am skimming or not trying to understand or other crap is making think less and less of your case.

[raider8169]

I've read through the case on BM, and I'm not finding it particularly strong. Oh, there are some decent theoretical points made about roles and such, but there is very little actual evidence. Sorry, but without something more solid (my death by poisoning tomorrow would certainly be evidence enough - he targeted me last night IIRC) I can't really justify throwing my support behind his case.

I don't really know why people are disliking the case on Tom so much. Read back over my posts and see for yourselves how dishonestly he was acting throughout the last couple of days.

BM targeted Skruffs on N3. So Skruffs dying of poisoning would be proof.

Assuming that the posion kill is delayed. If not they can target skruffs tonight have him die and we would not know any better and then possibley hold BM accountable for it.

[raider8169]

@ EGL

Im not saying you are not explaining yourself well enough. I have back tracked and I think I understand what you are saying, now its just that I think its got alot of chance involved.

The idea is good IF there are posioners (which there is a group that kills via posion) and that they are scum (still possible could be town SK's). I think the best chance is for them to be scum but I do not think its 100% based on what we know. As no one is claiming to the posioner either they are scum and not admiting to it, town and we are not on the right track, or scum and still not on the right track. I think this is something to revisit tomorrow when we have more information. If scruffs dies tonight by posioning that would say that the people who targets scruffs the night before would be the killers if the posion is a delayed kill. Do we know 100% that it is a delayed kill?

[raider8169]

The thing about Skruffs, I said before. SL could watch Skruffs tonight and make sure nobody targets him.

If nobody targets Skruffs tonight and Skruffs dies of poisoning, then we know it's a delayed kill. We also have a 50/50 of who did it.

If nobody targets Skruffs tonight and he lives, we can't actually denounce the poisoner/delayed kill as a possibility. We can, however, clear BM and Caboose from being a poisoner.

This is what I like to read. Its a plan though it can be stopped if someone offs the watcher but as someone else might be watching or something it opens up more information to be received.

You are right in that I have not asked direct question. I have just been pointing out what I feel are weak parts in your thoughts.

The real question is that I would like to know if your goal is to lynch BM? Or atleast what you would like to come out of all this.

[raider8169]

Because I say it is not.

If it is not important then what is the point in holding out?

[raider8169]

Because I say it is not.

If it is not important then what is the point in holding out?

Probably SL is worried that her result might lead to a lynch and wants to be certain about it herself rather than release it and have a lynch she isn't sure about herself. At least, if I was going to hold onto a result in her situation, that would be why.

Wouldnt that be part of releasing the results if that was the case? Either way at least I can understand why now.

[raider8169]

It might be wise to do a mass prod as we may have lost people when the site went down.

[raider8169]

Don't worry, there isn't much chance of that happening. >_>

I've been trying to get a wagon going on what I see as the best target for today - Tom - and the responses have been few and far between.

I have not had much time to try and find the case as you have too many posts. Can you help me narrow down the pages that your case was on?

[raider8169]

I have not had much time to try and find the case as you have too many posts. Can you help me narrow down the pages that your case was on?

Sure - this is where I first voted for him (well, the post after it but it was really just an EBWOP).

Thank you, I will read it in the morning and give my 2 cents worth.

[raider8169]

I have not had much time to try and find the case as you have too many posts. Can you help me narrow down the pages that your case was on?

Sure - this is where I first voted for him (well, the post after it but it was really just an EBWOP).

Thank you, I will read it in the morning and give my 2 cents worth.

Sorry, a family thing came up and I dont have the time today. I am suppose to be back late tonight so I am hoping to update tomorrow.

[raider8169]

I just finished reading the TM case. It has merrit but I like the case on BM better. The thing that makes me like the idea of a BM lynch more is because of the information he is holding out without a real reason as to why.

[raider8169]

I just finished reading the TM case. It has merrit but I like the case on BM better. The thing that makes me like the idea of a BM lynch more is because of the information he is holding out without a real reason as to why.

Care to place a vote on BM then?

I will assuming BM does not post the information in his next post.

[raider8169]

I just finished reading the TM case. It has merrit but I like the case on BM better. The thing that makes me like the idea of a BM lynch more is because of the information he is holding out without a real reason as to why.

Care to place a vote on BM then?

I will assuming BM does not post the information in his next post.

I am tired of watching BM drag things in circles with this whole posting information charade.

If he had anything to post, he would and should have posted it weeks ago.

Yeah I am getting to that point. What if he does have information. Waiting for one more post is not asking for too much I think. Of course if the post does not come before the deadline I will of course vote.

[raider8169]

Vote BM

Lying is not protown no matter how you twist it even if you were just trying to save your hide. I thought from the start that the role could be protown but I think that BM would have admited to that instead of claiming cop and possibley drawing out the real cop if their is one. I do not see anything better coming out of today.

[raider8169]

BM told me so thats how!

Where? In scumchat?

[raider8169]

Vote BM

Lying is not protown no matter how you twist it even if you were just trying to save your hide. I thought from the start that the role could be protown but I think that BM would have admited to that instead of claiming cop and possibley drawing out the real cop if their is one. I do not see anything better coming out of today.

Lynch all liars? really? After how often you see me fight against it?
If you think about it, you might realise the reason i dont support LAL is because, for reasons Tubby listed, and more, lying is an aspect of a townie's arsenal in games. Obviously it isnt always a good idea, but perhaps when im dead, youll look back and think "shit, what BM did actually made sense...if only i could have seen past the end of my nose without the benefit of hindsight!" lol

Note, i had claimed cop before the poisoner discussion really heated up. The idea was to draw the NK, and probably protection too. I also felt that, with my role such as it was, i could blag enough results to keep me going for as long as i needed. In the end, it didnt really work out.

BM

Once you were busted visiting scruffs what did you think people would think once scruffs was dead? How do we know you are not a vig? How is lying helping town? You are killing people and we dont know which side you are on. You didnt post your investigation results and withheld them saying there was a reason behind it. You were just digging a hole for yourself and now that the truth is out how are we suppose to know you are now telling the truth? This is not a case of lal. Its just one of the reasons.

[raider8169]

(p.s. about the card thing don't feel bad i diddn't send my own mother a card this year)

Only scum forgett about their own mother!!! Die scum Die!!

Mod

, can we get a vote count?

[raider8169]

basically i do not like the self hammer move its bad, egl decided that at times it is a good play, we disscussed it tward the end of it i was treyin to see if i could run a rabbit season /duck season gambit but it diddn't work,

I agree that self hammers are never good. The problem however is that we only have 9 people active and it takes 8 to lynch. If you dont vote we will have to wait until deadline before anything happens.

[raider8169]

@raider- then it looks like we will wait then

Agreed, in that time something else may come up and of course it can just take one person popping in for some random reason to hammer and then leave again.

[raider8169]

I think this game will be seriously quiet if not abandoned altogehter if he is lynched. cause we will have almost as many lurkers and actives and it will turn into a disscussion peice between me, egl, and BA. with occasional comments by lowell,spring,and caboose

Wow way to leave me out. I feel so welcome in this game.

[raider8169]

damn it raider i am sorry i knew i was leaving someone out, but you get my point right?

Yes I do, only I do not think it will be as big of a problem as we will have less and less people. We just need to get replacements and then we will be ok.

[raider8169]

Raider, would you replace into a game that was over 100 pages?

The game would not be 100 pages if some people would learn how to express a complete thought... and in English.

This is true I would not be able to jump in and someone expect me to read all 100 pages. This has to be like one of the longest running games. I should look into that.

[raider8169]

EBWOP: WOW there is another one that was 170 pages... and BM was in that one lol

[raider8169]

I apologize for not posting; my house recently caught fire and I have been understandably busy.

Im sorry to hear that, hope everyone is ok.

[raider8169]

Just so everyone knows I am waiting for the deadline to hit or someone to hammer.

[raider8169]

This seems a little odd concidering how close we are to the deadline.

I cant remember the deadline rules. Is what we have right now concidered a no-lynch?

[raider8169]

Also, who's the tracker/watcher again? Are we making sure that they check on my target?

Think about this if you were scum or town. Either case you would follow through with it and in both cases we would not have more information other then that person is going to die the following day. It would not confirm you being town or scum. I concider the whole play WIFOM so in my mind that alone can not be trusted. Was their more to the idea? I reviewed your other posts and did not see anything else

[raider8169]

Just so everyone knows the deadline is tomorrow. As it stands we will have a no lynch.

[raider8169]

still not hammering, still believe bm alive is better than bm lynched

This is extremely scummy at this point. A no lynch helps out only the scum. Do you not understand that?

[raider8169]

still not hammering, still believe bm alive is better than bm lynched

This is extremely scummy at this point. A no lynch helps out only the scum. Do you not understand that?

Congrats. You just made it onto the hitlist!

Firstly, at what point wasnt it scummy? Secondly, Tubby cant hammer me now anyway, i'm not at -1.
Thirdly, why does a NL only help scum?

BM

Um Thanks..

First, I dont understand the first, a no lynch is bad for town, its the only method we have of killing that the town has control over. As a majority of the players are town even though half need to be replaced.

Second, I would hope that cyber jumps back over as well. It was not scummy that he switched as there was still time however as no one followed there is not much of a choice. Tubby would rather no lynch then lynch, that is scummy.

Third, as far as we know there are no town killing roles. You have not been confimed as town so we can not trust that you are killing on behalf of town. So lynching the killing roles means less deaths at night and then that gives more chances for town to lynch the scum.

BM, Do you think the wisest move for town is a no lynch?

[raider8169]

Cyber fully intends to stay off the wagon, in exchange for me killing Tom Mason tonight. He will NL, because it means a scummier player gets killed. Of course, if you're right and he intended to hop back on for the hammer, if an inactive showed up, then maybe he isnt to be trusted... We'll see i guess.

I didnt know this. Not sure what he will do however there is not much time to do it.

Ok, but remember who you're talking to. Assuming i'm town, which i always would be doing, how is me getting lynched a better play than NL?

Less NK means more chances to lynch right? I would say that is how we are suppose to get the scum but we have yet to be successful. Plus now you have the chance to kill another person and we are to trust that you will kill who you say you will. Then the basis of killing them is solely on you instead of everyone.

Furthermore you say you are a vig but you may not be swiss. You dont even have to be one of the two scumgroups that we know about. I always remember vigs are on their own in other games. I have nothing to back this up just speculating.

BM, Do you think the wisest move for town is a no lynch?

Given the circumstances, of course. It's a choice between nailing guaranteed town power role, and killing a potential scumbag. I dont see how NL could possibly be better in the short term. My only doubt is that im prolonging the inevitable, but because me being alive gives us an extra weapon in the meantime, im content enough.

You could be town or you could be scum. Either way you will kill someone tonight. Well delayed but someone will most likely die. What if you are wrong and you end up killing a townie? The end may justify the means however it also may not. We will not know until it happens. I guess the only thing I can do it trust that Cyber knows what he is doing.

[raider8169]

Vote: Battlemage

Until I catch up or find a reason not to.
No I do nto know what is going on since I have been absent.

so putting bm back to l-1 is a good move "while you catch up"?????

seriously??

Its better then a no lynch. Plus the guy is set to die tonight, if he is town then lynching the person who is causing his death would be the townie thing to do.

[raider8169]

Fos: raider8169

you didn't comment on whether you thought BM was town or not.

??

Have you caught up? Cause I did within the last 30 pages or so. Im pretty sure I even summed it up when I voted him.

[raider8169]

this is a mistake and will be regretted,,

How do you "know" this is a mistake. Do you 100% know something we do not?

[raider8169]

no i am not implying anything ,,

Good. If you were I think my brain would explode.

sorry for the almost accisdental explosion

Ok, I got the same impression but the point is that you are not 100% sure he is town as you just cant be unless you knew something we did not.

I will say that I will miss BM and his one million posts.

[raider8169]

In case i'm not allowed to replace back in, here are the scum in order of certainty:

Lowell
Tubby
Raider
Tom Mason/Cyberbob

Lowell and Tubby are almost certainly scum. If the game isnt over with them, id try Raider next, and then move on to testing the Tom Mason/CyberBob thing-as its possible that 1 of them are scum.

People like EGL and Blakadder are probably just foolish town. And Tubby, if you are town, you just earnt yourself a friend for life.
Sadly, i think your play is just too good for a townie.

BM

I keep moving up your list. You just dont like the way I think. Cant say I blame you I look at things much differently then you. You are a claimed killing role and act for yourself and not for the majority (which the majority of everyone is town). I think I just have something agianst killing roles as that make the game shorter day wise and the more deaths in most cases mean more dead townies with a couple of scum if there are lots of killing roles.

[raider8169]

Bah!

[raider8169]

Woot!

The only informaiton I had was that Cyberbob was town. I said so a few times so I was hoping that would have caught on.

I got a few guiltily's on people but they were killed the following day and if you read my role I was not sure of my sanity and that is why I asked BM that. I knew he was lying at that point and that was why I thought him to be scum. Good job everyone!

[raider8169]

thats what i thought when i relaced into this game ,, since two out tof the three mafia were already dead,, atleast i did a good job of covering for killa seven,

Its funny as soon as BM flipped I knew you were scum. Only I died before I could say anything

[raider8169]

You know, I just realized this and I am pissed...

I proposed the idea to give killa seven and Lowell a kill... AND I GET F'ING KILLED!?

Thanks a lot...

Who did you think they would kill? I thought that to be obvious as soon as it was offered.

[raider8169]

Raider's alive again?

lol, did you notice the topic that says game over?