Mini 738: The Town of Merrin - Game Over

[mykonian]

about springlullaby: could she be replaced?

[GIEFF]

I think I understand what you are saying, mykonian. You are saying that calling Zilla towny WAS part of a nested assumption, i.e. it is bad if we lynch Zilla pre-claim ONLY if she is a townie?

Do you think qwints' post accurately summarizes your intent?

What do you mean by the game dying?

and I see you have found another scumslip with panzer: congrats. Care to talk about your Dourscum-slip?

Slips are relevant because they reveal more about what is going on inside your head than you meant to reveal. I wrote Dourscum because I was thinking that he was scum at the time I was writing the post. I am not denying this. I DID think Dourgrim was scum at the time I wrote the post. Are you bringing this up AGAIN because you really think it's valid, or are you bringing it up because you think I am being hypocritical? I find the two types of slip very different, so I don't feel I am being hypocritical.

Slips where you call people townies are VERY different. They aren't just brainfarts; they reveal that you know more about the person's role than you should.

-------------------

I don't think we can replace SL, as she continues to pick up her prods.

[mykonian]

I think it is bad to lynch without a claim. I think it is also bad to lynch someone because people can't think of anything other anymore: town got to keep it's options open. (I've been lynched in two games after each other day 1, while there was a lot of doubt if I was scum, but that I was the only option after 20+ pages...). If zilla is scum, we should lynch her, that is the easy part.

Qwints is almost right, his sentence only needs an "in case".

the game dying: getting more inactive, less new thoughts, slowing play and tunnelvision. I feel it is starting. 20+ pages is too long for some people. add to this the chronic inactives and it becomes a problem.

hypocritical is not quite the word, the problem I try to point out is that it is quite easy to find these slips. Even if that person is town. And because we have seen a lot of slips here and there, I think it becomes too much. I feel you are looking for very small things to make cases that normally wouldn't be there. All because you assume that townies can't make them just as easily.

about SL: annoying. Very much. Can I propose a policy lynch? There are worse times to do it then day 1.

[GIEFF]

All because you assume that townies can't make them just as easily.

This is where we disagree strongly. Townies CANNOT make slips of that nature just as easily, because they don't have any extra information they have to pretend not to have.

about SL: annoying. Very much. Can I propose a policy lynch? There are worse times to do it then day 1.

There has been too much scummy behavior today to fall back on a policy lynch instead. I think you are one of the only players who has trouble finding people are scummy.

So, yes, I only vote my biggest suspect, even when I would no lynch him based on the evidence.

I wish I could lynch two or three people instead of just one. I don't get why you don't see much evidence of scummy behavior in the last 28 pages.


I agree we need to decide on a lynch soon. 28 pages is too long for a day 1.

----

Goat, I'd like to see as concise a summary as possible of your case on Zilla.

[Goatrevolt]

I don't want to policy lynch SL, or have her replaced. I think she's more likely to be town if Zilla is scum (early pressure on Dejkha would have to be busing in that case), which I think is likely. I just want her to catch up and start playing the game.

I think Zilla should claim. We have, what, 5 votes on her + GIEFF + mykonian's call for a claim.

All subsequent discussion has been just muddying the waters. GIEFF, if you think Zilla is scum, then why are you creating all this extra noise to distract from her lynch? Why aren't you voting for her?

Actually, your recent posts have been made with more of a conciliatory tone in regards to her. Do you no longer think she's scum? If so, what changed your mind? If not, why are you almost apologetic in your tone regarding her lynch?

--------

I'll respond to other posts later on.

[PJ.]

I'm calling for a Cease Fire, until Zilla claims. I refuse to read anypost in between Now and Zilla's claim(or refusal to do so)

[GIEFF]

Again, it was not my intention to distract from the Zilla discussion. I asked Dourgrim a question many pages ago, and he just recently got around to answering it.

I don't see the conciliatory tone, and I do still think she is scum. I have not re-voted her because she is at L-2, and I have recently realized that there are a number of things I don't like about this lynch (although these do not negate Zilla's scummy behavior).

• I don't like the way Dourgrim hopped on the wagon after I hopped off. I thought you wanted to avoid the WIFOM in a Zilla lynch, Dourgrim?
• I don't like the way Panzer hopped on the wagon after I hopped off, especially the fact that he APOLOGIZED to Goat while doing so, and when looking at his recent voting history (see below).
• I don't like that both of these hops on the wagon happened at least partly due to being convinced by Goat.
• I don't like that Goat is now trying to get me back on the wagon.
• I don't like the fact that mykonian has TWICE called Zilla a townie.
• I don't like Panzer saying "we are in danger of overthinking this lynch" after I hopped off.
• I don't like the fact that the very first person to vote Zilla was B_B, in the midst of him failing to defend himself against accusations.

I would like to see a concise summary of your case on Zilla, Goat. It will help me decide if Zilla's scumminess outweighs the problems I see with lynching her. Consider my support withdrawn for now; I do not want Zilla to claim yet.

For those on the Zilla wagon now; how much more do you support a Zilla lynch than you would a B_B lynch? I think they are similarly scummy, yet the Zilla lynch has some issues that the B_B lynch does not.

unvote qwints

Panzer's recent voting history:

Unvote: Vote: Beyong_Birthday, Unvote: Vote:Zilla FoS:Beying Birthday Post 265
Unvote:Zilla, Unvote: Vote: Beyond Birthday Post 296
Unvote. Vote:Zilla Post 298
Unvote, Vote:Beyond_Birthday Post 433
Unvote:Vote:Zilla. Post 623

Any way the wind blows, doesn't really matter to me.

To me.

*cue piano*

[GIEFF]

I'm calling for a Cease Fire, until Zilla claims. I refuse to read anypost in between Now and Zilla's claim(or refusal to do so)

No. Emphatically no. Scummy, scummy, scummy. Once there is a claim, it is difficult to turn back. Making two people claim is worse for the town than just making one person claim.

You don't care who we choose to lynch between Zilla or B_B, right Panzer?

[Goatrevolt]

Goat, you want me to "nitpick" and "deflect" by answering your questions? Eh? I mean, pick a side here; either I point out how your arguments are invalid (apparently nitpicking or deflecting, depending on what day of the week it is) or I try to answer them without directly pointing out why your "information" is wrong (these are always, ALWAYS ignored). Either read my posts, or stop saying my responses are "deflection" and "nitpicking" when I point out why they are invalid.

No. Answering my accusation is not nitpicking or deflecting and I've never implied it to mean either of those. Deflecting is not answering the question and instead changing the course of discussion. That is something you are fond of doing. Nitpicking has never been a part of my case on you. I recall referencing it once to show the difference between two aspects of your play.

Furthermore, you rarely try to point out why my points against you are wrong. You tend to resort to deflection, or calling my statements a misrepresentation without any underlying reasoning.

So, what point about "how my vote should have been on Birthday earlier" are you talking about?

I've mentioned this so many times thus far. Here's one of the many places I reference it:

The contradiction aspect of Zilla is that she was not voting for who she thought was most likely to be scum. She was not even attacking who she thought was most likely to be scum. She was attacking me, and I was the one attacking Birthday, who was most likely to be scum at the time. The time period I speak of is Post 387. In that post, she lists me as 20% likely to be scum. You are at 50%, Panzer is at 40%. Birthday is at 75%. Later on in the thread, Zilla says that Birthday is at 75%, and she also says that her opinion on Birthday had not changed at all during the period between Post 387 and that post. What that means is Birthday was at 75%, you at 50%, Panzer 40%, me 20%. Her vote was on you, and then it swapped to me. She did not vote or attack Birthday, who was her top suspect. That is contradictory and scummy.

Also, where's this explanation of ditching Birthday? I see this erroneous quote that shows you missed the intent of the post..

I don't like how they've

changed their tune about Birthday entirely and completely just because I DID vote him

. That's putting the cart before the horse. I was apparently scummy for not voting for someone they thought was scum, now they're saying

I'm scum because I'm voting for someone they think is town.

OMG OPINIONS CAN'T CHANGE LOL!

Bolded sections are contradictory. The first bolded section says that we changed our mind about Birthday

because

you voted him. The second bolded section says that we voted you

because

we changed our mind about Birthday. You're arguing two separate and contradictory reasons to try to call us scum.

Duh, they're contradictory. That was the point, I'm pointing out how your moves and reasons are contradictory. I vote Birthday because he's more likely to be lynched AND he is a valid suspect AND he gives information about you, and suddenly, Birthday's not the lynch anymore, and suddenly, all the suspicion you built up on Birthday is apparently vaporized because I voted for him, and somehow my vote on him is scummy because I'm trying to "appease" you.

My suspicion on Birthday wasn't vaporized because of your vote. I changed my mind prior to even reading that post. It was a nail in the coffin, though, as there was literally no townie rationale for you to change your vote like that. You just spent post after post arguing about how you thought I was scum, and that you were pissed that GIEFF was trying to push you from changing your vote off of me. Then you went around and changed your vote to Birthday. The reason you gave: because it would tell more about me. The opposite is also true. My lynch would tell more about Birthday. That simply isn't a valid reason.

I'm thinking by association here that Birthday is innocent, and Goat was initially trying to get him lynched, but he was afraid he'd be too accountable for the results. I don't know where GIEFF factors into this, considering he was very VERY softly involved in the Birthday push, but I'm reasonably certain that Goat's the most likely scum player given his constant skewing of facts.

Right, because that makes any sense. You're arguing that I was afraid of the accountability of lynching a townie, and that's why I backed off of Birthday. By that same standard, shouldn't I have backed off of you, or are you not a townie?

I would like a clear summary of your case on me, and yes, I'm going to "nitpick" it to point out the flaws. I don't think it's going to "convince" you otherwise, but I want to see how much of your case is still based on your skewed info. At the very least, it'll serve as a base to stop this "You didn't answer some vague argument that I'm not going to quote or link" business and ought to clear up a ton of misconceptions. In the off chance that you are town, it might help you at least realize how nebulous and unfounded some of these arguments are.

I have no issues with nitpicking. I have issues with misrepresentation and deflection. It may take me a while to write up the post, but I should have it by tonight.

This isn't the first time he had a "townie" slip (although people don't seem to think these are important, I very much do).

There's a huge difference between knowing someone is a townie, and thinking someone is a townie. Calling someone a townie because you think they are a townie isn't scummy. Calling someone a townie because you know this is the case is scummy.

Mykonian saying Zilla is a mislynch doesn't imply that he knows she is a townie. It could mean that, but it could also mean that he thinks she is a townie, and thus he thinks her lynch is a mislynch.

I don't like that Goat is now trying to get me back on the wagon.

I'm trying to get you to take a stance. You unvoted her to vote someone you aren't even interested in lynching. I think it's scummy and ridiculous that you backed off a wagon on someone you think is scum at 5 votes. As for a conciliatory tone:

Zilla, you are very likely going to be lynched shortly, so if you are town, you should be trying to post as much as possible, getting people to react to the idea of your lynch, and answering people's questions. The more information we have about a lynchee the better, as you have said yourself.

You can start with my question about which points in my qwints case were valid, and why you don't have anything but a neutral read on him if you do indeed think they are valid.

Zilla, I still feel that you are today's best lynch, and you can consider my vote one of the 7 needed for a lynch, and one of the 7 needed to prompt a claim from you. This should answer others' questions about my qwints-vote, too.

Both of those take a more conversational tone, and the first one sounds almost resigned to the idea of a Zilla lynch. Also, I note you stopped trying to convince others to lynch Zilla and have instead moved towards discussion of "what if Zilla is town" and "we need info in case Zilla is town" type posts. It's clear your mind has changed.

And yes, I want to lynch Zilla, so I'm trying to convince people to vote for her. Is that somehow scummy? I recall you trying to convince Zilla that her vote was wasted on me. Is it different when I argue that you're wasting your vote on Qwints?

[militant]

Ok, I've skipped over every post by Gieff and Dourgrim, This arguement is totally unnecessary and superfluous. It looks like two pro-town players having a pissing contest. Now, can we LYNCH B-B or Zilla. I'm seriously done with it being Day 1. We need some damn info. Shit, if you guys really want to LYNCH me but I don't see the sense in you guys argueing about what essential ammounts to nothing.

I agree. I think it would be beneficial for the day to end soon. As Panzer pointed it would give us more information and hopefully greater clarification. I have to admit I have not read the "GIEFF vs. Dour" argument but if it is two players who are likely to be town arguing over not a great deal then it causes further confusion and that is what scum want. To repeat a apt metaphor posted by Goat further discussion would be "muddying the waters".

about springlullaby: could she be replaced?

I don't think we can replace SL, as she continues to pick up her prods.

She may be active on the site but that is irrelevant is she continues not to post in this game in particular.

about SL: annoying. Very much. Can I propose a policy lynch? There are worse times to do it then day 1.

I am strongly against a policy lynch on the basis that she is chronic lurking. I don't know but if SL's lurking is being caused by business in real life that has no influence upon her alignment.

Your quick off the mark GIEFF. When I clicked "Post Reply" Goat's was the last post I had to read and then you go and make more work that is keeping me from my bed...

For those on the Zilla wagon now; how much more do you support a Zilla lynch than you would a B_B lynch? I think they are similarly scummy, yet the Zilla lynch has some issues that the B_B lynch does not.

That's me so I shall review the case on B_B tomorrow because it just passed midnight here in Britain (you can sock another sad face at me but it would be awfully contradictory of you Dourgrim so I would advise against it) but as you still seem wide awake GIEFF could you post your thoughts on the view that perhaps this day has dragged on a bit too long and it would be better to choose a lynch candidate and get some more information to try and make a more informed lynch tomorrow.

As Panzer said:

the game dying: getting more inactive, less new thoughts, slowing play and tunnelvision. I feel it is starting. 20+ pages is too long for some people. add to this the chronic inactives and it becomes a problem.

I have noticed this problem with a few heavyweights frequenting the thread more often than I regard as healthy doing

most

of the discussion and most others wavering in their activity levels or posting a little bit at a time (a prime example being Panzer himself). So what do you think; I ask you in particular because your one of the heavyweights I described and seem persistent in continuing discussion especially when your so confident of either B_B or Zilla being scum, surely with your confidence you could try one today and if unsuccessful reevaluate or lynch the other tomorrow.

I'm calling for a Cease Fire, until Zilla claims. I refuse to read anypost in between Now and Zilla's claim(or refusal to do so)

No. Emphatically no. Scummy, scummy, scummy. Once there is a claim, it is difficult to turn back. Making two people claim is worse for the town than just making one person claim.

You don't care who we choose to lynch between Zilla or B_B, right Panzer?

I agree with the first of your points GIEFF. It is scummy and your example gives more information to mafia. I dislike the use of the leading question though. You seem to be trying to pressure or manipulate what Panzer feels he needs to write before he has written it although I am not defending him.

[GIEFF]

I'm trying to get you to take a stance. You unvoted her to vote someone you aren't even interested in lynching. I think it's scummy and ridiculous that you backed off a wagon on someone you think is scum at 5 votes.

I believe I backed off at 4 votes. Two people have voted since I unvoted, and Zilla has 5 votes on her now, right? I've already explained my reasoning for voting qwints; I wanted to see how Zilla would respond to the vote. At the time I voted qwints, I had every intention of switching back to Zilla after I saw how she reacted to it. The fact that two people jumped on the wagon before I could made me hesitate, first because she was at L-2 and I didn't want to put her at L-1 incase somebody pre-claim quick-hammered, and later because of the reasons I listed above.

People have said that we shouldn't lynch people who don't have connections, and I feel I have revealed a connection between qwints and Zilla. Based on their interaction after my vote for qwints, I believe that if we lynch Zilla and she flips scum, qwints is a lot more likely to be scum.

This is why I couldn't say this at the time, and why I wanted to hear Zilla and qwints respond before I explained it. If I said my vote was just for reaction-fishing, no reactions would have been caught.

Both of those take a more conversational tone, and the first one sounds almost resigned to the idea of a Zilla lynch. Also, I note you stopped trying to convince others to lynch Zilla and have instead moved towards discussion of "what if Zilla is town" and "we need info in case Zilla is town" type posts.

No matter her alignment, the more she posts while her bandwagon builds, the better. The more people she interacts with the better. Going back through the thread and re-reading after more people's alignments are known is HUGELY beneficial to the town, and I am just trying to maximize that. If we Zilla is town and we lynch her, I want to get as much information out of it as possible, and so I am trying to get her to create some, as I hopefully did with my qwints-vote.

The second quote of mine was meant to explain that at no point did I think qwints was a better lynch than Zilla. It was not a vote meant to lead to a lynch, it was a vote to gain information.

And yes, I want to lynch Zilla, so I'm trying to convince people to vote for her. Is that somehow scummy? I recall you trying to convince Zilla that her vote was wasted on me.

No, I don't think it's scummy. I just don't like it. I see the pro-town reasons for doing it, but I would feel more comfortable if it was somebody who was not as pissed off at Zilla as you are. I think emotion may have been at least a partial factor in my initial Zilla vote, so I'd find it hard to believe that it is not at least somewhat to blame for your current desire to lynch Zilla.

If a number of people on the Zilla wagon are there in part due to you, this is bad for the town if either you are scum, or a townie who finally let his emotions get the better of him. I agree that Zilla's behavior is genuinely scummy, but I am not sure it is scummier than B_B's, and I think emotion may be the deciding factor. Just because Zilla's behavior was more recent than B_B's does not make it scummier.


Goat, are you opposed to a B_B lynch? If not, how much more in favor of a Zilla lynch are you than a B_B lynch?

You seem to be trying to pressure or manipulate what Panzer feels he needs to write before he has written it although I am not defending him.

It is almost a rhetorical question, as I am sure the answer is yes, based on his voting history. He has switched his voted between Zilla and BB

five times

.




I agree this day has dragged on too long, but I don't think that means we should rush the lynch. mykonian appears to want a Zilla claim, but as I no longer do, we still need one more person to ask for the Zilla claim before I would be comfortable with her giving it.

And I would prefer we switch to Beyond_Birthday. militant said he will review B_B's case to make his decision, but I would also like to hear from Goat, Panzer, and Dourgrim about how they feel about switching from Zilla to B_B.

Vote: Beyond_Birthday

[Goatrevolt]

No, I don't think it's scummy. I just don't like it. I see the pro-town reasons for doing it, but I would feel more comfortable if it was somebody who was not as pissed off at Zilla as you are. I think emotion may have been at least a partial factor in my initial Zilla vote, so I'd find it hard to believe that it is not at least somewhat to blame for your current desire to lynch Zilla.

If a number of people on the Zilla wagon are there in part due to you, this is bad for the town if either you are scum, or a townie who finally let his emotions get the better of him. I agree that Zilla's behavior is genuinely scummy, but I am not sure it is scummier than B_B's, and I think emotion may be the deciding factor. Just because Zilla's behavior was more recent than B_B's does not make it scummier.

Emotion is not a factor behind my vote. If it was, I would have voted her far earlier. She was actually my top townie directly after she attacked me the first time, despite my intense frustration in defending against it. My opinion slowly began to change throughout the thread. Occasionally, yes, because of a direct emotional response, but more so because of the points she was bringing up and the underhanded nature of her play. I think emotion actually kept me from voting her earlier, because I kept shrugging off my suspicion of her because I assumed I was just emotionally invested.

Goat, are you opposed to a B_B lynch? If not, how much more in favor of a Zilla lynch are you than a B_B lynch?

I am opposed. I think Zilla is scum, and if Zilla is scum I think BB is much more likely to be town than scum.

As for the two people who jumped on the wagon, one was Panzer, who had expressed both his willingness to lynch Zilla before and his preference in lynching someone who was not him. I don't think you can be surprised in any way by his jump on the wagon. The other was Dour, who admittedly, was a little fishy, in that he admitted that my case was solid, but didn't immediately commit, and only committed later when I noted that Panzer could be a Zilla scum-bud.

Overall, though, you are suspicious of the wagon buildup. I'm suspicious of the lack of wagon buildup. Since this has started, subgenius and ting have completed disappeared, despite having posted after our cases on Zilla but not taking a stance on them. Springlullaby has continued to promise to catch up but hasn't. Both mykonian and qwints are opposed. You hopped off the wagon. etc.

[Goatrevolt]

And as for connections. I have plenty of connections to draw if Zilla is scum. Every player in the game has interacted with her in some fashion, and I think there is a huge wealth of information in determining who is scum/town after this. While that is not a reason behind my desire to vote Zilla, that should also not be a reason to be against lynching her.

[Beyond_Birthday]

I have read to this point and I must say that I don't like this attack by Gieff:

For those on the Zilla wagon now; how much more do you support a Zilla lynch than you would a B_B lynch? I think they are similarly scummy, yet the Zilla lynch has some issues that the B_B lynch does not.

which seems to contradict to this exact response to my attack on Zilla, Post 549:

Unvote

Vote Zilla

AND TO NOTE! THIS IS THE ENTIRE POST 550!

I don't understand Gieff's reversal over the past 5 pages since he only unvoted Zilla to pressure and pursue to a point young qwints. His unvote failed to revote Zilla, but it seems that he is stating he has a reason to doubt the Zilla lynch without reason. He then asks Goat for his case, while ignoring the validity of mine. He doesn't provide any reason why my case isn't good enough anymore.

By his own logic that town would stand by their convictions, this looks slightly scummy, and I am posting this for reference. I still strongly feel that Zilla is scum and will maintain my vote there.

[Beyond_Birthday]

EBWOP: Post 548, not 549 was my case. 549 was an EBWOP to post 548.

[GIEFF]

I am opposed. I think Zilla is scum, and if Zilla is scum I think BB is much more likely to be town than scum.

But isn't the reverse true? If BB is scum, then isn't Zilla much more likely to be town than scum?

And what if you just focused on level of scumminess, all WIFOM and informational considerations aside? Is Zilla far above B_B on the scummy-scale, in your opinion?

Emotion is not a factor behind my vote. If it was, I would have voted her far earlier.

If there is one main person driving a wagon and trying to get votes for it (and succeeding), I would be more comfortable if that person wasn't the one who was attacked for pages and pages and pages by the lynch candidate. Even if you are a townie who truly believes you are not at all influenced by emotion, you very well could be, and just not realize it.

Looking at my own behavior, Dourgrim and I are both still sort of pissed at each other, Zilla didn't look as scummy to me until she was doing to me what she did to you, and my vote for B_B didn't come until after he exploded at me and Zilla. I like to think of myself as unemotional and logical as possible, but it's not possible to completely divorce emotion from logic.

I kept an objective as an outlook as I could to try to keep my constant frustration with Zilla from clouding my judgment.

I will thoroughly enjoy ripping this to shreds. Let us begin:

That is not the way a player with an objective outlook posts.

----------

don't understand Gieff's reversal over the past 5 pages since he only unvoted Zilla to pressure and pursue to a point young qwints. His unvote failed to revote Zilla, but it seems that he is stating he has a reason to doubt the Zilla lynch without reason. He then asks Goat for his case, while ignoring the validity of mine. He doesn't provide any reason why my case isn't good enough anymore.

I'll try to explain it again, although I understand why you would not like me considering switching from Zilla to you, regardless of your alignment.

I had every intention of revoting Zilla when I switched to qwints. However, before I got the reactions I was looking for, Zilla was placed at L-2. So, just as I did with you, I didn't want to put Zilla at L-1, to avoid a quick-hammer. This is why I didn't re-vote Zilla, but DID state that the Zilla lynch still had my support.

And I know that YOU already knew this about me, as you quoted it yourself in post 548, which you just referenced. In fact, in that very post, you said it was scummy for Zilla to put you at L-1, yet now you don't like the fact that I didn't put Zilla at L-1. That is not consistent.

Only recently, after reading back through the thread again, have I rethought my actual support of the Zilla wagon. As soon as mykonian threw his support behind a Zilla claim, I realized that if I was to back off my support, I had to do it soon, as once Zilla claims, switching then becomes much worse for the town.

He doesn't provide any reason why my case isn't good enough anymore.

I would be happy to see a summary of your case, too. I asked for Goat's instead of yours because Goat has been the one gathering votes for the Zilla-wagon, because you are my preferred lynch candidate, and because Goat's case was more convincing than yours. I remember you said that you KNEW Zilla was scum because you got her to back off; can you explain what you mean by that in your summary of your Zilla-case?

Also, my initial vote for Zilla was not based on what you said in Post 548, B_B. While my vote did appear immediately after your post 548, note that it appeared just two minutes after your post - not enough time for me to have read it, digested it, agreed with it, and decided to switch my vote.

My vote was based on my own reasons (more reasons in post 528), and Goat's post 534.

What pushed me over the edge to vote for Zilla was her post where she voted you, B_B. Not only was she trying to appease me, which is scummy in and of itself, but she was doing it poorly. My suspicion was based on her saying you were scummy, yet all but ignoring you. Yet even when she voted you, she didn't say a single thing about you besides "you continue to look scummy as the game progresses." I found that completely ridiculous, and it showed me that she didn't really think you were scummy. If so, she would have said SOMETHING about you. She was just trying to

appear

to find you scummy. See below for context.

But I did realize something; Goat really isn't going anywhere, and we'll at least have more information on him post-day 1. Birthday continues to look scummy as the game progresses. Panzer's off lurking, which is pretty terrible in these conditions, and I'd definately like to hear more from him before the day ends.

Unvote: Goatrevolte --- IGMEOY
Vote: Beyond Birthday

[Dourgrim]

I don't like the way Dourgrim hopped on the wagon after I hopped off. I thought you wanted to avoid the WIFOM in a Zilla lynch, Dourgrim?

My vote had nothing to do with you, GIEFF, that was coincidence. Don't flatter yourself.

As for the two people who jumped on the wagon, one was Panzer, who had expressed both his willingness to lynch Zilla before and his preference in lynching someone who was not him. I don't think you can be surprised in any way by his jump on the wagon. The other was Dour, who admittedly, was a little fishy, in that he admitted that my case was solid, but didn't immediately commit, and only committed later when I noted that Panzer could be a Zilla scum-bud.

Your case for Zilla's scumminess was/is solid, and the possible pairing of Panzer and Zilla is a definite factor, agreed. Also, I'm a believer that bandwagons are a good source of information, especially when they're on people who have had good cases made against them already. That's why I jumped.

Here's my reads as of right now, if anyone cares. A lot of this is "gut reaction" rather than PBPA, so sue me:

Panzer: solid LAL case made in early game and getting scummier by the minute. Announcing to the world that you're going to intentionally ignore posts by certain players because you don't like the topic of conversation at hand is, at best, poor play. I agree that my debate with GIEFF didn't end up producing a solid case in either direction, and regardless what you think, NO ONE was more annoyed with that conversation than me, but deliberately ignoring it is deliberately ignoring potentially useful information down the road (see my read on GIEFF below)... unless, of course, you're asserting that you know GIEFF and I to both be Town. The only way you could know that is if you were scum. Therefore, you're either scum or a bad player. Either way you rocket to the top of my list yet again. Also, Goat's correct that there could be a Zilla/Panzer pair, which would mean that Panzer's scumminess could corroborate the Zilla case somewhat by association, but that's a minor point here.

Zilla: Goat's case against Zilla is solid. However, I initially got a Town read off of her when she first replaced into the game, and that shouldn't be completely ignored. While I agree that she's a good lynch candidate because of Goat's case, Panzer is still better.

BB: The case against BB was pretty solid, and even BB admitted as much. However, since that time he's given me a fairly strong Town read in his posts. Also, GIEFF has been pushing pretty hard for this to be one of the Town's choices, and whenever GIEFF starts pushing hard I tend to be suspicious (see our huge debate to understand why).

GIEFF: I am still very suspicious of him, although contrary to what he says I am

not

pissed at him (any more). I think he mini-quotes sentences and phrases out of longer posts to suit his interpretation, I think he tries to paraphrase and oversimplify other people's opinions to try and spin them into something they're not, and I think the "Dourscum" thing was significant despite his repeated claims that it was an honest mistake. I refuse to believe it's even

possible

for that to be an honest mistake. It also goes well with the misrepresentation I've accused him of before (which, incidentally, is one reason to read our longwinded debate thoroughly). I think he might be a perfect example of how a good grasp of logic isn't relevant to a players's scumminess. He's still near the top of my list, but Panzer is still higher.

springlullaby, subgenius, ting =): flat-out lurking. Play the damn game. Very good policy lynch choices if all else fails (I'd lean toward springlullaby because of the many "I'll post soon" posts), but

only

if all else fails.

qwints: I understand the case made against him since he joined the game, and it makes sense to an extent, but I don't have a very strong feeling about it one way or the other, and I did have something of a Town read on MacavityLock before qwints replaced in. Meh.

Goatrevolt: I'm really not all that fond of his playstyle, to be brutally honest... it's kinda nitpicky and unnecessarily confrontational at times. However, I've gotten a pretty consistent Town read from him all game so far, and his case on Zilla is solid and has yet to be clearly refuted IMHO.

mykonian: there's a definite link to Panzer here based on early play, but since then I've realized something: there is a language barrier here that makes myko's posts sometimes less clear than I'd like and could conceivably cause misunderstandings from time to time. Also, my top suspect's lynch might tell me more about myko in Day Two, so any suspicions I may have of him can kinda sit with Panzer as well (although they lose significant weight in doing so because links aren't a super-solid reason to lynch anyone, as has already been pointed out by others in this game).

militant: I really don't have much of a read at all on him, except that he's also ignoring the conversation with GIEFF and I, and I believe that to be a mistake (see Panzer above).

unvote: Zilla

vote: Panzerjager

[Beyond_Birthday]

Something he said, this is NOT his post.

I'm not saying you stopped supporting Zillalynch, just that you seemed to be switching you tone, as though to say my lynch may be preferable, and I was just making this thought known.

Where's Zilla?

[mykonian]

All because you assume that townies can't make them just as easily.

This is where we disagree strongly. Townies CANNOT make slips of that nature just as easily, because they don't have any extra information they have to pretend not to have.

ok, to state it different: you can find them by town just as easily. You have pointed two (or three?) out in my posts, and all were just ways of saying things, nothing conclusive...

So, yes, I only vote my biggest suspect, even when I would not lynch him based on the evidence.

I wish I could lynch two or three people instead of just one. I don't get why you don't see much evidence of scummy behavior in the last 28 pages.

I don't get how you think the evidence

proves

that people are scum.

about springlullaby: could she be replaced?

I don't think we can replace SL, as she continues to pick up her prods.

She may be active on the site but that is irrelevant is she continues not to post in this game in particular.

about SL: annoying. Very much. Can I propose a policy lynch? There are worse times to do it then day 1.

I am strongly against a policy lynch on the basis that she is chronic lurking. I don't know but if SL's lurking is being caused by business in real life that has no influence upon her alignment

agreed, it won't be better then a random lynch. But on the other hand, what do we lose when she is a towny? close to nothing. Otherwise scum will just leave her in the game, and we'll be sitting here with an inactive player.

[PJ.]

Where was the other claim? i haven't seen any claims.

Also dour..I'm not reading any more wall-o-texts. it's annoying.

[GIEFF]

Dourgrim and Panzer; how do you feel about switching from Zilla to B_B?

-----
I tried as hard as I could not to bring this up, but I have to. I will keep it as brief as possible.

And, for the record, your statement of "you cannot convince me otherwise" (used twice in the post) says to me, plain and simple, that you have no business playing Mafia. If you're really so tunnel-visioned that you can't possibly be swayed away from your preconceptions of what other people's words actually mean, you're a poor player, good logic or no.

I think the "Dourscum" thing was significant despite his repeated claims that it was an honest mistake. I refuse to believe it's even possible for that to be an honest mistake.

Please listen to the yourself of a few pages ago. Your first quote describes your second perfectly.

You need to open your mind. This is ridiculous.

Not sure about GIEFF still, but I think most of that is because I was in his crosshairs for so long before. There's still the "Dourscum" thing,

but that's not really enough to base a case on.

Agreed. I don't want you to bring up the Dourscum thing again unless it is part of a bigger case and it is accompanied by you voting for me. It is upsetting me, and I do not play logically when I am upset.




Dourgrim, what has changed since you made this post:

I think Panzer has a decent shot of being a scumbuddy to Zilla, based on my read of her playstyle.

I don't think he's a better lynch, though.

At this point I can agree with that.

vote: Zilla

This puts her at L-2, just so you're all aware.

If you thought Zilla was a better lynch a few pages ago, why are you now back on Panzer?

[mykonian]

Agreed. I don't want you to bring up the Dourscum thing again unless it is part of a bigger case and it is accompanied by you voting for me. It is upsetting me, and I do not play logically when I am upset.

I think a few people would be pleased if you returned the favor, and made a case not only based on slips. Not accusing you, just pointing out that you exactly say what I think about it.

[kloud1516]

Vote count and prods (if needed) on the way.

[kloud1516]

Prodding subgenius.

I am giving springlullaby until tomorrow to post something of contribution, or else she will be prodded. If she does not respond to the prod, or still has problems keeping up, both she and ting=) will be in the same boat (see last sentence of this post).

ting=) has notified me of being v/la due to internet connection issues. I will give him several more days, before putting the option before all players as to whether or not they feel replacement is necessary.

[kloud1516]

Vote Count X

Zilla

(4): Beyond_Birthday, Goatrevolt, militant, Panzerjager

Panzerjager

(3): ting=), subgenius, Dourgrim

Beyond_Birthday

(2): qwints, GIEFF

GIEFF

(2): mykonian, Zilla

Not Voting:

springlullaby

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch

Please notify me if there is a discrepancy in the list above