Mafia 87 - New Age Mafia - Game Over!

[ZazieR]

It's that she said she didn't find Der Hammer all that suspicious, but didn't seem to mind if he or I got lynched. Maybe this is a weak point, but it's in a townie's best interest to see someone scummy lynched over someone who's merely a useless player, but not suspicious. Not only did she not fight for that, she didn't even seem to express an opinion to that effect.

And what did al4xz do then? Didn't he vote DH as he saw him as a useless player, even as a village idiot, a VI, but no comment about that from you. He even said it himself, he voted DH, but saw you as scummier. I'm surprised that you only attack Jazz for this, while she kept her vote on you, the one who she saws as most suspicious, while al4xz didn't.
Speaking of al4xz

ProddyProdProd for al4xz, please

. He hasn't posted since last sunday, while he said that he would have more time.

I've seen two games of him where he voted for strange reasons. But both are ongoing so I don't think it's allowed to talk about it. But yeah, it's common for PP.

[Puta Puta]

alx4z needs to give us an answer.

[OhGodMyLife]

al4xz has been prodded.

[OhGodMyLife]

Vote Count #6 of Day 2

al4xz (6) -- iamausername, Tom Mason, ZazieR, Vi, DoomCow, Puta Puta
Puta Puta (2) -- ribwich, Caboose
Scheherazade (1) -- Jazzmyn
Jazzmyn (1) -- Scheherezade

Not Voting (3) -- al4xz, Gerrendus, Percy

With 13 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch!

[Gerrendus]

Seems to me Sche isn't making good on his succient promise. Especially since to me it all looks like several different refrences to something he admits as a week point? Sche's been told already to stop wasting our time, and yet continues to do so. Any misgivings I might have had at the beginning of the day about voting for him are now gone.

Vote: Sche

[Puta Puta]

Seems to me Sche isn't making good on his succient promise. Especially since to me it all looks like several different refrences to something he admits as a week point? Sche's been told already to stop wasting our time, and yet continues to do so. Any misgivings I might have had at the beginning of the day about voting for him are now gone.

Vote: Sche

what is ur opinion of a al4xz lynch?

[Scheherazade]

Seems to me Sche isn't making good on his succient promise.

If a one sentence summary of why I cast a vote for a player is too wordy for you, then by all means, you have a point. Check post 379 if you can't figure out what I'm referring to.

Especially since to me it all looks like several different refrences to something he admits as a week point?

Oh, you're right. I should just insist that any case I make is air-tight and refuse to acknowledge criticism of it.

Furthermore, it isn't scummy to have a weak case and a vote cast on those grounds is unjustified.

Sche's been told already to stop wasting our time, and yet continues to do so.

Whose time am I wasting? You're not reading my long posts, so I'm obviously not using any of your time, much less wasting it.

Furthermore, one of the "points" you previously brought up against me was that I seem to be responding to the town's wishes (individual post 20). There's a huge contradiction between that post and this post. Would you care to explain it?

Any misgivings I might have had at the beginning of the day about voting for him are now gone.

Vote: Sche

Your only "misgiving" was that you didn't have enough evidence to cast a vote (individual post 17). I generated a modest amount by questioning Jazzmyn: you haven't reacted to that. Fine. However, you haven't presented any evidence against me. So you must no longer be concerned with gathering evidence before voting. Which makes this what kind of vote?

It could be an attempt to relieve pressure on Jazzmyn or al4xz. This is supported by a lack of comment on the al4xz lynch, which you might want to do because he was accused of committing the same crime as you at the end of day one, and a lack of reaction to the case I made against Jazzmyn, which you absolutely

must

have read, because you're willing to use your evaluation of it to lynch me.

So is al4xz scummy or not? Why?

What evidence do you have that I'm scummy?

[Scheherazade]

EBWOP:

@ZazieR: First, al4xz said he found Der Hammer scummy, not merely useless. See individual posts 12, 29, 32, and to some extent 37. The posts where he mentions Der Hammer as a "useless player" or "village idiot," posts 34, 36 and 37, those reasons are simply given as the reason why he chose one scummy player over the other scummy player.

Second, Jazzmyn was notable because she said that she didn't find Der Hammer suspicious. If she didn't find him suspicious, I assume (and I must assume, because she didn't expand or explain much) that she did not think him likely to be scum. If there's one player who's likely to be scum and one who's unlikely to be scum, wouldn't a town player push to get the one that's likely to be scum lynched and point out why the one that's not likely to be scum isn't scummy?

Does that answer your question?

And thanks for the bit about P. P.

[OhGodMyLife]

Technically the deadline should be Wednesday the 26th, but since I gave you no second warning until now I'll extend it.

Day two will end on Saturday the 29th of November if it hasn't already.

[Gerrendus]

what is ur opinion of a al4xz lynch?

I addressed that in post 387 (at the beginning) and again in post 398 in response to Tom Mason's questioning.

Now @ Sche:
Don't accuse me of not reading your posts. I do. The entire length of them. Honestly why I don't post sometimes because I am so tired after reading your "analysis" that I cannot form a coherent argument. You admitted to using a post for a diversionary tactic to prevent the hanging of someone whom we see to be scummy. Now I will grant that these players may provide us with new insight, but someone that is acting scummy shouldn't be allowed to walk free.

I've been suspicious of you from the start, that's one of the reasons why I had my vote on you for so long on day 1. As I explained I found your behavior as scummy as Ders. (Note: Behavior, meaning that while Der Hammer was town he still acted scummy in my opinion), I have already responded to the al4xz lynch claim, as I addressed at the beginning of this post. I do not recall where you addressed al4xz, although it may have been lost in the mountains of posts you have been submitting on Jazz. My misgiving at the start of the day was that if DH was innocent and I was suspicious of you for similar reasons it might be possible that you were also innocent.

And I did not say you were adhering to the town's wishes. I said you

Were not

, which I have said time and time again. All cases have their flaws but you seem to enjoy utilizing long posts to make a single weak case, when you have been asked to keep it succinct.

[Caboose]

alx4z needs to give us an answer.

I would like an answer from you. Why did you put your vote on alx4z?

[Scheherazade]

Don't accuse me of not reading your posts. I do. The entire length of them. Honestly why I don't post sometimes because I am so tired after reading your "analysis" that I cannot form a coherent argument.

First, you have low posting habits regardless of the length of my posts in this thread. Don't pin your low participation on me.

Second, you can say you've read them but I don't have to believe you unless you show that you've read them. Given that you're trying to lynch me, showing what's scummy about my posts might be a good idea.

Third, as I'd like to believe you're telling the truth, what do you think of Jazzmyn? You haven't given a single opinion on the whole thing.

You admitted to using a post for a diversionary tactic to prevent the hanging of someone whom we see to be scummy. Now I will grant that these players may provide us with new insight, but someone that is acting scummy shouldn't be allowed to walk free.

Incorrect. I said that I posted recommending bluntly that we delay the lynch until we get more material on other players. I never suggested that al4xz "walk free."

I do not recall where you addressed al4xz, although it may have been lost in the mountains of posts you have been submitting on Jazz.

Day one.

And

I did not say you were adhering to the town's wishes.

I said you Were not, which I have said time and time again. All cases have their flaws but you seem to enjoy utilizing long posts to make a single weak case, when you have been asked to keep it succinct.

I'm still suspicious of sche.

He may claim that what he's doing is proactive but he seems to be responding to what the town wants.

Not sure if that's a good or bad thing, it can be argued both ways.

I bolded.

Succinct?

[Jazzmyn]

Jazzmyn was notable because she said that she didn't find Der Hammer suspicious. If she didn't find him suspicious, I assume (and I must assume, because she didn't expand or explain much) that she did not think him likely to be scum. If there's one player who's likely to be scum and one who's unlikely to be scum, wouldn't a town player push to get the one that's likely to be scum lynched and point out why the one that's not likely to be scum isn't scummy?

Yet another misrepresentation of my posts, I see. Seriously, Sche, you should just stop it. My posts are there for all to read, so it does you no good to continue to try to distort them.

I never said that I did not find DerHammer at all suspicious. Nor did I say, as you pretended to quote in another of your posts that I found him "not suspicious". Rather, I said that I did not find him

particularly

suspicious, while simultaneously pointing out the things about him that I did see as potential concerns, and concluded that I didn't find him suspicous enough to vote for, and that I found you to be more suspicious than him.

And this just in from Bizarro World: You seem now to be arguing that I must be scum because I didn't push harder to get YOU lynched instead of DerHammer. I voted for you. I explained why I was voting for you. I kept my vote on you even when the bandwagon shifted to DerHammer because I found you to be more suspicious than DerHammer. I posted my disagreement about which of the two of you were more useless, and expressed again that I found you to be more suspicious than DerHammer. What more, exactly, was it that you think I should have done to get you lynched instead of DerHammer?

And one thing that you keep failing to recognize: if you were town and I were scum, why would I give a darn which one of you or DerHammer were lynched? Answer: I wouldn't. If I were scum, I would have voted for DerHammer somewhere around the middle of the pack and been quite happy with a town lynch, any town lynch.

Instead, I voted for you and kept my vote on you because I found you to be the most suspicious player, and I am voting for you now for the same reason.

Regards,
Jazz

[Gerrendus]

How do you know my posting habits? I've only done this one game here. The only other reason I don't post is if I have nothing more to contribute to a discussion, rather than waste time. My suspicions of you, stemming largely from day one and your desire to continue to attack individuals and utilize logical fallacies and overall waste time are the same as they have always been, I'd prefer not to waste more time pointing them out when they are readily apparent in your own posts.

Seeing as I believe you to be scum wouldn't it therefore follow that I would disregard anyone you are pushing to be lynched at this point in the game? I think your arguments are mostly weak and possibly borderline OMGUS, although there are a number of targets you could ahve selected, she perhaps presented herself as the easiest target for your tactics.

My apologies, it seemed like taht is what it seemed like you were saying with al4xz.
So day one evidence is good enough for you? You don't have any recent evidence to support your claim?

There is yet another misinterpretation (or perhaps a total disregard and intentionally taken out of context?) My remark on "He seems to be doing what the town wants" was in regards to the fact that at the time I made it, it looked like you were going to follow through with shorter, more succinct posts rather than subject us to logical fallacies, as has been shown. My latter post saying you weren't was in regards to the fact that you did not stick to that resolution.

[Percy]

alx4z needs to give us an answer.

I would like an answer from you. Why did you put your vote on alx4z?

^^^I would also like to know this.

My suspicions of Jazzmyn are somewhat alleviated for the time being, but I would like to see her scumhunt rather than just defend herself. Sche, are there any questions that she still hasn't answered that you want answered?

[Puta Puta]

Because he is scummy?? don't question my expertise noobz

[Caboose]

Because he is scummy?? don't question my expertise noobz

Well...
That was ... ummm... helpful.

Vote stands.

[ribwich]

Because he is scummy?? don't question my expertise noobz

So....when I asked you if you thought he was scummy and you replied "Nope!".....that was a lie?

[Puta Puta]

Because he is scummy?? don't question my expertise noobz

So....when I asked you if you thought he was scummy and you replied "Nope!".....that was a lie?

ehhh...what, when, where?

[ribwich]

You still haven't really contributed anything other than saying al4xz should claim. Why do you want al4xz to claim? Do you find him suspicious?

nope, claims are fun and exciting. it would be more fun if alx4z makes a riddle and the solution is his role.

[Puta Puta]

oh shit i contradicted myself, lol

[Caboose]

oh shit i contradicted myself, lol

Confirm Vote: Puta Puta

[Percy]

I want to hear from al4xz, liek,

nao

.

Puta, behaving like this

will

get you lynched. It's really anti-town play. If you're a townie, you're hurting us with this erratic, unreasoned play style. Either play seriously, or don't play. Don't take us down with you.

Vote: Puta Puta

[Vi]

Posting before prod. I've been falling behind in my games recently, sorry...

I've been trying to think of possible pro-Town motivations for what Puta Puta is doing. I can't think of any. I'm trying to see how al4xz could be scummier than Puta Puta at this point. About the only thing I can think of is that al4xz played like he knew what he was doing, whereas P. P. seems to be acting scummily for the sake of it - if that can even be a point against al4xz. Now I'm trying to see how Der Hammer could have been scummier than Puta Puta at this point. Der Hammer was incompetent, true, but he was at least trying to help. Last, I think I see a dynamic between al4xz and Juls in the Slayer's Gambit incident earlier on.

Thus I'm not really sure why Puta Puta

shouldn't

be lynched, frankly.

Unvote: al4xz
Vote: Puta Puta

(L-3)

------

Yup, it is a diversion. I don't like the town swinging from lynch to lynch as if they're monkey bars. I'd prefer to sort everybody out a bit before we charge towards another lynch. If that means admitting that I don't want to see someone scummy lynched before TAX (now Percy), DoomCow, iamausername and PutaPuta post more and are scrutinized, then I'll say it.

In light of the deadline (this Saturday), is this still your opinion?

No, her vote post on day one says "I don't like his attitude" not "I think he's scummy for X, Y and Z." In fact, the original infraction considered scummy by others on the wagon she said didn't look particularly scummy to her.

Post 179, correct?
That vote was *influenced* by emotion, but I think it would be incorrect to say that's entirely why you were voted.

I'd like to hear what YOU think of Puta Puta. (Considering I don't know what that means in whatever foreign language that is, I probably should reword that.)

[Tom Mason]

@ PutaPuta: Sigh, you are either going to get us killed or yourself killed. I prefer the latter.

Unvote: al4xz

He will not be forgotten. If someone replaces him, they will have to carry the weight next phase.

Right now, I think this has to happen, despite what I said earlier just thinking Puta Puta was playing like a fool.

Vote: Puta Puta