Mini 684: Quacks and Masons Mafia- Game Over

[Sun Tzu]

Also, what do you mean you are just pressuring me and not suggesting lynching me? That makes no sense.

[Riceballtail]

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

[Sun Tzu]

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

Wow. This game is easy.

[militant]

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

Lmao, You make me laugh Rice! So if you think I am scum, why are you voting me, should you not be trying to find the quack to lynch him?[/sarcasm]

You say me, Rofl and Sun are the scum. Would you kindly elaborate on why you think Sun and Rofl are scum? Just saying "he looked scummy when Datte called him out on some of his previous posts" will not suffice; how about you try writing some more detail when you vote, why don't you contribute to the discussion surrounding the people you think are scum? Your vague and stupid comments (no offence but I think being so vague in a mafia game is stupid to be frank) are beginning to annoy me.

You are voting me still based on a single suggestion to create discussion. Then again you make up what appears to be bullshit to "confirm" your vote on me. The funny thing about that is that you contradicted yourself blatantly in post 214. You say I am ignoring you when it was in fact you who was ignoring some of my posts and questions. Still now you have failed to answer them. You state in post 214 that I am "disagreeing with a town plan" yet when asked what town plan you was talking about you totally ignore my question which leads me to believe that you posted that but it is not actually true, you used it as an excuse to make me look bad. You also contradict your self in the last sentence in post 214; you accuse me of trying to make a case of lies when it seems that is exactly what you were doing. This must be what, the fourth time of asking.

Rice: Could you please respond to my questions in posts 195 and 216.

Pacman, I think you are doing something I just learnt about in another game known as "active lurking". You post irrelevant messages every now and then perhaps to aviod being prodded, I did a very quick re read of D2 and found only 5 posts, only one contributing anything to discussion:

OH CRAP
Being busy. Possibly not able to post tomorrow. Sorry.

hmm... this is not funny...
I have no idea about what to do...
FAR AWAY WARNING: I'll be busy next week. I will possibly have none access oct 30-nov 3. Sorry (that's what I have for being smart )

I agree; we are on a dangerous situation, and if we commit a mistake, then we will lose the game
hmm... what must we do now...

Ouch.
I'm extremely confused, and I'm going into V/LA soon (as my sig says).
I'll make a complete reread later, and then come up with useful content.
Sorry.

Sun, do you need to quadruple-post? that's annoying.
Me confused

Could you please respond with a relevant post outlining your thoughts on the game. I mean this in the nicest possible way of course, don't want to make you feel bad for being busy or anything, would just like to know what you think.

Anyway, Hello Jazz, fellow replacement

I will post my thoughts about Sun tommorow, he seems to be acting a little shifty. Strange also how when he is accused or called out he posts a lot but before hand he did not post a lot at all, Sun is another one that could be said to be "activley lurking" I think.

[raider8169]

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

What are your reasons behind those people being the scum?

[Jazzmyn]

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

You do realize that articulating reasons for your suspicions is not only desirable but required, and that simply making bald allegations is neither desirable nor compelling, don't you?

Regards,
Jazz

[muffinhead]

vote count

Riceballtail (2)- militant, roflcopter

militant (1)- Riceballtail
roflcopter (1)- Netlava
Sun Tzu(1)- Dattebayo
Dattebayo(1)- Sun Tzu

Not Voting (3)-pacman281292,raider8169, Jazzmyn

5 votes will lynch

[roflcopter]

yaus! internets! barack obama! life is so good right now! but typing on this handheld device is a real pain, so its gonna take me a while to write an actual post. its in the works.

people overseas might be even happier than americans about this election, btw

[roflcopter]

Roflcopter is a scummy because he seems to exaggerate how scummy he finds other people. With clammy earlier in the game, it was ok since it was coming out of random stage, but now his posts continue to follow this same trend, which I don't like. From my experience, I've found that scum tend to exaggerate people's guilt and throw out words like "malicious" etc.

Vote: roflcopter

how convenient that you raise an issue now with my treatment of clammy, but had nothing to say about it when it actually happened. something fishy is going on here.

Whew.

I had to read the entire thread from start to finish twice to make sense of what happened on Day 1, and I've also been working my way through reading each player's posts in isolation to try to get a sense of who's who in terms of pro-town v. scummy players. I haven't got through all of the players' posts in isolation yet, but in the meantime, I thought I should post my overall impressions so far.

As a replacement coming into Day 2 after a disastrous Day 1, I am cognizant that I have a different benefit of hindsight than those of you who were here on Day 1, since I wasn't here at the time that you were all posting what you did on Day 1, so I have tried to keep that in mind while re-reading the second time. I have tried to separate out the things that struck me as suspicious

only

with the benefit of hindsight from those that struck me as suspicious even

without

the benefit of hindsight. Of course, it is impossible to do that with 100% accuracy, for obvious reasons, but I have tried.

Overall, I find roflcopter the most suspicious for his constant exaggeration of the alleged scumminess of others by way of very short posts almost entirely devoid of substance and entirely devoid of evidence in support of his allegations.

1

I am not impressed or swayed by dramatic accusations in the absence of evidence, and roflcopter seems to be trying to hone "dramatic accusations in the absence of evidence" to an art form.

2

The player who pings my scumdar most after roflcopter is Sun Tzu, because he seems to be flying under the radar without contributing much to the thread, but then showing up to hammer once the townies have committed to a (in my view, flawed - sorry to say) plan which was very likely to end badly for the town. It is often the case that among scum teams, there are vocal ones who take the lead and quiet ones who sit back and try to fly under the radar, showing up only when necessary. Sun's Day 1 history seems to fit the bill for (one of?) the quiet ones among the current scum team as he's posted very rarely, and has offered little, if anything, in the way of analysis but showing up when absolutely necessary to support the scum team.

As I said, I tried to separate out the hindsight parts of my review for my first substantive post since I wasn't here on Day 1 and most of the rest of you were, but I will be happy to expand on the rest of it further during the course of discussion.

Regards,
Jazz

1 i can only assume you're talking about the stretch of posts from me, addressed at clammy, earlyish on day one. did you read me in isolation, or with clammy's posts interspersed? i think you'll find i make a lot more sense when you see what it was i am responding to. and make sure to check out the timestamps, as a large chunk of that exchange took place in very quick succession.

2 you've clearly never read any of my games (and why would you have) but yes, for me it is an art form. i make cases based on gut reads, and generally evidence comes after i build up some momentum. in this case, my push against clammy garnered support directly because of his own actions, so i didn't need to implicitly state anything myself.

Meh, still here. Was actually writing a post.

Anyway, I don't feel as though my opinion has changed, although I'm glad someone else agrees that rofl is scummy.

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

i just love how quickly you fell in with jazz's opinions, especially in regards to sun. scummo wants a pet townie?

Our scum: militant/rofl/Sun

Thanks for playing guys.

You do realize that articulating reasons for your suspicions is not only desirable but required, and that simply making bald allegations is neither desirable nor compelling, don't you?

Regards,
Jazz

you do realize that your superior vocabulary is intimidating to cretins and mongoloids like the rest of us poor sinners in this thread, and convolutedly verbose posts like this only serve to cow the uneducated, don't you?
[/joke]

[Dattebayo]

Also, what do you mean you are just pressuring me and not suggesting lynching me? That makes no sense.

Votes have many uses one of which is lynching; another is using it as pressure. I'm apparently using it as pressure. I fail to see how that doesn't make sense.

This is ridiculous. What we discuss in a mafia game is who we should lynch and why. I don't know where you get the idea that I thought we should end discussion and lynch my suspects right now. I never said anything like that. I put some ideas out for discussion.

No, townies scumhunt; while this does involve lynching, a large part of discussion involves gathering reads on players. We were early in day 2 and really didn't have much evidence to go on and yet there you were advocating a lynch. I'm glad that you brought up the fact that you were never actually voting here:

If you read my post, it is obvious that you are lying. I didn't even vote. Therefore, I can't be bandwagoning and I can't be trying to end discussion.

You suggested lynching quite early day 2 but you didn't vote. That seems like scum testing the waters. You wanted to check if others would go along and then you yourself would actually commit.

1. I didn't advocate an early lynch.

2. I didn't advocate a plan that would obviously cause the town to lose.

3. Your "pressure" has nothing to do with my reads.

4. There's no defense against "seemingly bandwagoning". If someone votes for someone who has votes, there's a wagon. That's not much of an argument.

5. For one thing, my suspicions are not heavy. For another, that's what the game is about anyway. When did suspecting people become a scum tell anyway? If it is, you don't look very good. You're dropping heavier suspicion than I am.

1. Once again, I showed where I got this notion that you were advocating an early lynch in detail. Yet all you've done is straight out deny it without an actual response to my evidence regarding this.

2. The same here as in #1. I showed where I got my accusation from and explained. All you've done is deny it.

3.

As soon as I ask you to give examples, you back off of your accusation of Net. You failed to bring something even as simple as "I found his posts insincere". And you read over Net and didn't find anything; this implies that you didn't read over net when you first dropped suspicion.

Oh right, my pressure had nothing to do with your read on Net .

4.

There's no defense against "seemingly bandwagoning". If someone votes for someone who has votes, there's a wagon. That's not much of an argument.

I explained my reasoning behind this; so there actually was room for you to defend yourself. It wasn't just an empty accusation.

5.

If you didn't have any heavy suspicions, why did you hammer Clammy or suggest that we target Net if Rice turns up town?

Methinks you did have heavy suspicion. And your strawmanning me again. Nowhere did I say that suspicion alone was suspicious. Allow me to quote my explanation and the

real

accusation:

5. Looking back at you day 1 posts, you were interested in hearing out the entiriety Clammy's plan. But then later on, you suddenly express willingness to hammer Clammy without so much as stating a single reason. In addition, I find your willingness to attack Net odd because you never expressed any suspicion of him on day 1.

5.

Oddly

dropping heavy suspicion on players

I also want to reiterate Militant's point:

Strange also how when he is accused or called out he posts a lot but before hand he did not post a lot at all, Sun is another one that could be said to be "activley lurking" I think.

Netlava wrote:
Roflcopter is a scummy because he seems to exaggerate how scummy he finds other people. With clammy earlier in the game, it was ok since it was coming out of random stage, but now his posts continue to follow this same trend, which I don't like. From my experience, I've found that scum tend to exaggerate people's guilt and throw out words like "malicious" etc.

Vote: roflcopter

how convenient that you raise an issue now with my treatment of clammy, but had nothing to say about it when it actually happened. something fishy is going on here.

Nice catch!

[Netlava]

Sun, do you need to quadruple-post? that's annoying.
Me confused

Pacman, thoughts on game?

Netlava - tone and anti-town plan

riceballtail - overdefensiveness calling everyone he disagrees with scum and scumbuddies

How is my "tone" scummy? Also, the "anti-town plan" isn't anti-town. And even then, "anti-town" =/= scummy. I think set-up speculation was useful earlier in the game given the unique set-up, and that people were too keen on shooting down plans rather than building upon them, which may have potentially resulted in sub-optimal play.

Also, you never mentioned this d1.

how convenient that you raise an issue now with my treatment of clammy, but had nothing to say about it when it actually happened. something fishy is going on here.

Roflcopter is a scummy because he seems to exaggerate how scummy he finds other people.

With clammy earlier in the game, it was ok since it was coming out of random stage, but now his posts continue to follow this same trend, which I don't like.

From my experience, I've found that scum tend to exaggerate people's guilt and throw out words like "malicious" etc.

[Netlava]

Also, overdefensiveness is not a valid scumtell.

[pacman281292]

sorry, flooded of games... Currently 2 over my limit-o-games...
@Netlava: Why is not overdefensiveness a valid scum tell?
@rofl: Funny note: mod's color is BLUE!
Currently, there are lots of cases and cases, really damn hard to interprete and sometimes really weak. I hadn't checked which of these are strong and which of these are weak; we have just 12 pages, but all them full of really annoying (and scary) quote walls. Another factor which makes the game hard to read is the "fragmentation" on discussion, and the long periods of inactivity. I really need to make a damn hard reread on this. Sorry.

[Riceballtail]

But there was no need for speculation, because the entirety of the roles were given to us by the mod.

[roflcopter]

[steve irwin]observe the scum, rice, in its natural habitat, where it is free to ignore points made against it and strawman netlava[/steve]

[roflcopter]

[irwin]crikey![/stingray]

[raider8169]

Vote militant

This is starting to drag on and I think you are the best lynch at the moment.

[roflcopter]

Vote militant

This is starting to drag on and I think you are the best lynch at the moment.

there's something really wrong here.

now i love a day that is short and to the point probably more than anybody else, but your last post was questioning rice's blank assessment of militant, myself and sun and all the sudden you're wagoning militant simply because the day is dragging?

[Dattebayo]

Vote militant

This is starting to drag on and I think you are the best lynch at the moment.

Reasons?

[militant]

Vote militant

This is starting to drag on and I think you are the best lynch at the moment.

With 3 town dead and only 6 remaining rushing into a lynch because the day is "starting to drag" is horrible. I am not OMGUSing in the true sense of the acronym, I am Fos'ing you because your logic is horrid.

Fos Raider

. Also weird that if you really wanted the day to end you would want someone to be lynched as soon as possible, Rice had the most votes at the time of your vote so in theory you would have voted him, but no you voted me. Why?

[Sun Tzu]

This is interesting because Raider and militant have seemed the least scummy to me so far.

[raider8169]

Vote militant

This is starting to drag on and I think you are the best lynch at the moment.

With 3 town dead and only 6 remaining rushing into a lynch because the day is "starting to drag" is horrible. I am not OMGUSing in the true sense of the acronym, I am Fos'ing you because your logic is horrid.

Fos Raider

. Also weird that if you really wanted the day to end you would want someone to be lynched as soon as possible, Rice had the most votes at the time of your vote so in theory you would have voted him, but no you voted me. Why?

I feel rice is trying to scum hunt and I think he found something. I thought a little extra pressure on you may be helpful. The intent of the vote was to hopefully pick up game and get people talking. For now the vote stays, why are you not scum?

[roflcopter]

i agree with net that so called "overdefensiveness" is not a scumtell. town and scum have equal desire to not be lynched, getting lynched is working against your win condition no matter what it is, so defending yourself against a lynch is never a scumtell.

[Jazzmyn]

Pacman, I think you are doing something I just learnt about in another game known as "active lurking". You post irrelevant messages every now and then perhaps to aviod being prodded,

This is a good point.

Anyway, Hello Jazz, fellow replacement

Hello, militant.

I will post my thoughts about Sun tommorow, he seems to be acting a little shifty. Strange also how when he is accused or called out he posts a lot but before hand he did not post a lot at all, Sun is another one that could be said to be "activley lurking" I think.

Yes, I noticed that he didn't post much at all until after I called him out on that very point.

i can only assume you're talking about the stretch of posts from me, addressed at clammy, earlyish on day one. did you read me in isolation, or with clammy's posts interspersed? i think you'll find i make a lot more sense when you see what it was i am responding to. and make sure to check out the timestamps, as a large chunk of that exchange took place in very quick succession.

I don't recall now whether I read your posts in isolation or in the thread proper (although I think I did both), but I will go back and read them as you suggested.

you've clearly never read any of my games (and why would you have) but yes, for me it is an art form. i make cases based on gut reads, and generally evidence comes after i build up some momentum. in this case, my push against clammy garnered support directly because of his own actions, so i didn't need to implicitly state anything myself.

No, I have never read any of your games, except for this one. I will re-read the thread with this, too, in mind and see if that alleviates my suspicions.

Regards,
Jazz

[pacman281292]

Pacman, I think you are doing something I just learnt about in another game known as "active lurking". You post irrelevant messages every now and then perhaps to aviod being prodded,

I understand this perfectly. I recognise my lack of content. I'll try hardly and I'll be more productive.

@ALL: Please calm down. We have only 9 alive now, and if we mislynch a doc and the quack commits a mistake, the game will be over before daybreak.

roflcopter's temper is definitely not cool (not means exactly scummy, but...). There were some sarcasms (mostly 279's) I didn't like at all.
hmm... and this activity sucks...
aww