Mini 767: Cubic Mafia (Game Over!)

[Nocmen]

/confirm

[Nocmen]

Magnus_orion, are you scum?

[Nocmen]

Magnus_orion, are you scum?

no. Are you?

Now why would I be scum?

I want two votes..

So you're a jester? DAYVIG!

[Nocmen]

I want two votes..

So you're a jester? DAYVIG!

Nah, I just wanna make a random vote again, theyre fun

Then vote for whoever you want to?

Though I will stand by my style of not wanting games to have long random phases, so I'll ask you something.


Who do you think is most likely to be scum and why?

[Nocmen]

Vote Riceballtail

Why'd you think I was scum last game?

Why are you using past games as a means of criticism/votes?

[Nocmen]

nocmen, as you do not want to participate in the RVS, who do you think is scum, and why?

Anyone could be scum right now. RVS is a nice way to see some voting patterns, but I much rather prefer just jumping ahead and asking questions to see how people reply when confronted early on, and then use that as a means of comparison if they come under fire later on.

Why are you using past games as a means of criticism/votes?

Isn't it quite common in the random stage to reference a past game?

Of course it is. I know it is mostly fun and games, but I like to get things started of seriously, and i'm not going to use other games as anything more than a means of comparison for posting styles, etc.

doublepost: Nocmen, if you are anti-random vote stage, what would you prefer to do to get the game going?

Exactly what I'm doing now. Asking questions. Do you have a problem with me asking questions?

[Nocmen]

Anyone could be scum right now. RVS is a nice way to see some voting patterns, but I much rather prefer just jumping ahead and asking questions to see how people reply when confronted early on, and then use that as a means of comparison if they come under fire later on.

Well, that's nice and all, but its another direct dodge of giving an actual answer to my question. I'm starting to notice a trend here.

Are you saying that you could get possible scum reads a day into the game just like that? I'm not going to base a vote off RVS or get suspicions from that, I prefer to see how their opinions and style changes as time goes on.
The only small scum reads I've gotten so far was PhilyEc's mentioning about how he thinks scum would post at certain times during RVS. This game has only been going on for a day, and I don't think that everyone would go and vote and post for RVS right away.
The second thing that irked me a bit was Issac's last post, but before I make a conclusion on that post, I would like him to respond to the question I asked him in my last post.

[Nocmen]

Exactly what I'm doing now. Asking questions. Do you have a problem with me asking questions?

Aren't you jumping to conclusions here?

When did I say anything about having a problem with you asking questions? When did I even make anything suggestive of an attack on you?

I asked for your ideas as to how to move the game into a more serious stage. I see no reason for your defensiveness. It seems a little shifty.

Are you saying that you could get possible scum reads a day into the game just like that? I'm not going to base a vote off RVS or get suspicions from that, I prefer to see how their opinions and style changes as time goes on.

If you admit that it'd be impossible to get a scum read this early, then why would you ask this question:

Who do you think is most likely to be scum and why?

I'm not saying its impossible for everyone, I'm saying its challenging for myself. Other people have different reasons for finding people suspicious and voting them. As for my possible "defensiveness", I saw you as slightly ignorant in your previous post to my questions, trying to get people to open their minds and get out of RVS. Ignorance to questions seem to me like you're possibly afraid of them, because I may ask you something that lets you slip up.

[Nocmen]

Isacc,

2 posts after a comment about dodging questions

you respond to a question with a series of questions and a statement of suspicion. Do you feel that you sufficiently answered the question directed to you? By the same token Magnus- you are noticing a trend of people dodging questions- what do you think of Isacc's answer?

To the bolded part, can you give the post number? I can't find any of my posts referencing question dodging.

To your direct question, yes I felt I answered it sufficiently. He asked me if I had a problem with asking questions, and I responded by saying I suggested nothing of the sort.


Also,

Noc

you failed to respond to my second question in post 52. Please respond to it, or else explain why it was ignored.

I beleive I did answer that question in my last post. The first lines of my post 54. I answered that before the first one, that you realized I answered.

[Nocmen]

Thanks Rice. That was the most useful post ever. Then again, I'm bored and relatively useless in games until discussion picks up, and this talk between Noc, Magnus, and Isacc is about to put me to sleep with boredom.

I think the conversation is pretty relevant. Do you have any comments on it?

[Nocmen]

btw,

hos: nocmen

you were mentioning conclusions about isacc's post?

Also, Isacc, for the sake of clairty, which question are you referring to?

I didn't see that post.

As for conclusions, I was saying that his actions could imply that he is afraid of questions I'm asking, because it gives him more chances to slip up.

[Nocmen]

Magnus, do you consider this to be a true statement,? Whether you consider it true or not, do you consider BB justified in making it? What do you see as his purpose and the likely result of him saying it in this game?

Well, err... I'd hope they'd listen to me.
I don't know, I supose I'm not good at convincing people, but fiding the scum is a different story. Generally, more people think I'm scum when I'm town, and call me obvtown when I'm scum, judging from the games I've been in. (Much to my amusement, of course).

That said, why ask these questions? High suspicion here. Looks like you're sizing me up to see how well you can convince people to mislynch me from my POV.

Am I to take from this that you don't think anyone could be scum, and you have narrowed it down to a certain group of people?

It's tentative at best, but I suspect walnut. You're also up in the air. If walnut turns out to be scum, I also suspect nocmen, but he's really the least suspicous, and completely dependent on walnut's flip at this stage. I reiterate, tentative at best.
See, its not so hard.

I note that your original question didn't ask Noc to give a few examples of scumtells, it said 'who do you think is scum and why' or words to that effect. This is a polarising way of phrasing the question, leaving him really with the 'all or nothing' option-set of either saying someone is scum or not. Having presented him with such a narrow set of options, I don't think you can complain when he opts to take the (more reasonable) middle ground by naming a couple of minor scumtells. Your case on Noc is not very strong, imo.

Lulz, what case? I don't have a case.
I never called nocmen scum.

I'm voting him so he answers what I have to say. I'd think that'd be obvious from the post I made.
speaking of which,

unvote

That said, your comments are interesting. I presented him with a narrow set of options? Would you rather I allowed him to include people not in the game? Do you consider there to be more options?

This bothers me, because it seems true of a lot of players, but is also an excuse for the scum to cruise through Day 1. How about saying something startling and waking yourself up?

Meta suggests BB lurks as scum, and acts indecisive. His play during this game has proven to be very different, so far.

That said, he clearly understands my playstyle, and may be trying to avoid me, but I don't think B_B would consider trying to convince me that he's town worth the risk of appearing scummy to others.

I think B_B is town, mostly because I was wrong last time I said that, and I said it for different reasons.

So you think B_B is acting differently, even with the last post he's made? To me, his last post seems like hes just actively lurking, posting enough to make us see he is here, but not contributing to the game. However, that is only from that last post.
And you do realize that just because you were wrong last time doesn't mean anything regarding the outcome of this time, right?

[Nocmen]

So you think B_B is acting differently, even with the last post he's made?

BB didn't active lurk, he just plain lurked.

And you do realize that just because you were wrong last time doesn't mean anything regarding the outcome of this time, right?

It means that what I thought back then made BB town is actually how he plays as scum, so the fact that he's playing differently suggests to me that he's town.

I'm okay with the differences, but why do you think he should be cleared from actively lurking? To me, that is still lurking.

[Nocmen]

What baffles me is that when I point out that BB is undermining your credibility (and, to use your words, potentially setting you up for a mislynch), you ignore the elements about BB and instead perceive it as me attacking you.

BB is undermining my credibility?
I humbly request you support this statement

BB is answering honestly and, from my POV, more or less correctly, about how I play.

You're the one who keeps pushing conversation down this route, resulting in this so-called "undermining of credibility"

Afterall, you've told us your obective right here:

4) To have all players thinking about the situation.

If this results in "undermining my credibility" without analyzing if I'm actually scum or not, doesn't that imply your objective is not to find scum, but instead get someone (namely me), to look scummy to people so you can get them lynched? (I want an answer to this.)

My, you do like to polarise things. Cases don't come simply in the form of stating "X is scum!" One might be tempted to think that the following posts...

I

LOVE

to polarise things. I want the town to divide into two groups on an issue, those with one thought and those with another thought. The scum will tend to agree with each other on the thought that benefits them, and then, they're found. Of course, saying that doesn't worry me too much, because the other option is for scum to be disunified, in which case, they're screwed due to infighting.

Reasons would be nice.

I don't know, I'm just sorta getting a gut "meh" on you. I don't fully understand it myself.

...might constitute a case, or as close to a case as it's possible to muster in the first 3 or 4 pages. You may have largely renounced your suspicions of Nocmen now, but from my point of view making my last post, he was clearly your top suspect at that point. Even though the vote may have been for pressure, it still indicates you found him suspicious enough to warrant pressuring.

Except I admitted that finding scum would be difficult at an early stage.

I was hoping for someone to encourage my falsely implied suspicion (basically that was on purpose) of nocmen, actually, because that would mean they were trying to encourage a nocmen lynch.
Instead I see something even more interesting develop. A small group of players (as opposed to a larger group) trying to discourage this, and that same group trying at the same time, to check how much people agree with me and how much people generally find me scummy (as opposed to in this game), as if to guage how well they will be able to undermine my positions in the future.

You misunderstand. The narrow set of options you provided was when you asked Nocmen to say who he thought was scum. Not who had done anything suspicious at that early stage, but who was scum. You effectively gave Noc two options: say someone is scum on a very limited set of evidence, or not call anyone scum ('anybody could be scum') and incur your wrath for supposed question dodging. When he gave some minor suspicions, you criticised him for not doing that straight away, when in fact the reason for that was the initial phrasing didn't give him the option to do so.

Yes, I was trying to guage both nocmen's reactions and people's reactions to it. (See above.)
I was hoping that more people would talk before the game reached this stage in questioning, so I could get more reads before explaining this, but, oh well.

You're actions now start to make sense, making me feel a bit more comfortable about what you did. Definitely thought through,and planned ahead. Not sure if that's good for town or scum though. I'll remain with you on neutral.

[Nocmen]

You're actions now start to make sense, making me feel a bit more comfortable about what you did. Definitely thought through,and planned ahead. Not sure if that's good for town or scum though. I'll remain with you on neutral.

how do you feel about walnut and caf19 in regards to what I did?

It seems to me that walnut is trying to generalize the game, trying to get as many others to comment as possible.
He also seems to be disliking your questioning a lot.
What I don't like is that caf seems to say a lot of what walnut does. Not much new to the table, IMO. However, this topic is getting a bit stale, I will admit.

@B_B: I really couldn't tell if magnus was trying to pull a gambit, or seriously pressure me into getting answers out of questions that didn't nessecarily have answers. Now it is the former though, and I'm not too surprised, but I do feel more confident with why he made the votes and actions he did.

[Nocmen]

There's a whole lot of active lurking going on this game.

I, for one, am starting to get annoyed at it.

I'm suspicious of all of you who are posting things like "I'm bored" or making these short posts. It doesn't really help your case either that you're not contributing anything on your own to the game as well.

Vote: Beyond_Birthday

[Nocmen]

This brings me to nocmen, who I think is right to question active lurkers... but criticizing short posts themselves is foolish. Not everyone writes long posts as a regular part of their playstyle, and expecting everyone to post large amounts of content per post is unrealistic, not to mention difficult to read.

I have no issue with short posts, some times people can get their point across in few words. It's some of the examples of short posts I have seen in here that really irk me. BB's "boredom" is the best example.

[Nocmen]

There's a whole lot of active lurking going on this game.

I, for one, am starting to get annoyed at it.

I'm suspicious of all of you who are posting things like "I'm bored" or making these short posts. It doesn't really help your case either that you're not contributing anything on your own to the game as well.

Vote: Beyond_Birthday

Hm... I don't think my posts have been generally short. Your attack on me is generally unfounded, but if a "bored" comment bothers you that much...*Smiles wickedly before cutting into my arm in a kind of writing*
*As blood pours down my flesh, I turn to Dour*

@Dour: My percents are a method of attack, not a play style. My mafia game might be flawed, but my town game is still strong.

*turns to caf19*

Who I'm hunting is difficult to read. I dunno if I'm easy to read or not. I don't care what you think of me, no matter if you're scum or not, that isn't my job. My job is to find the anti-town factions.

*Still writing in arm, turns to Nocmen*
One second...

*beat*

Done.

*Shows writing carved into arm*

OMGUS Vote Nocmen

*Collapses*
Ow...this hurts...so not worth it.

Wait...do you actually have reasons for doing so, or just randomly OMGUSing me?

[Nocmen]

Um, what? I found something I believed was telling, and I exercised my only tool for applying pressure (a vote) and noted said fact. I didn't go out of my way to ask for others' opinions... I explained my point and use of vote.

Oh, really? Yet you feel no desire to ask me questions? If you believe I'm scum, you should try and gather information out of me. Find the scumbuddies of mine that theoretically should go along with this belief. Besides, I wasn't saying that you were trying to look for other's opinions, but rather that you were trying to convince people of your opinion.

Um, what? I'm VERY OK with polite and civil... matter of fact, I tend to go after people who go out of their way to be rude as a policy because I believe rudeness in mafia games should be discouraged. And, for the record, "IMHO" isn't vague; it's an acknowledgement of the preceding statement being opinion rather than established fact. In this case, it literally translates to "In my opinion, this point is worth applying pressure with a vote."

Then why is being "apologetic" and admitting your own personal bias (Ie. My opinion) an additional scumtell to the backpedeling, according to you? (Hence the words "In addition...")

Post 119 is somewhat strange in general, though, as it constitutes another flip of opinion back to suspecting Noc again. In accordance, it appears that your previous retraction of Noc-suspicion was a 'test' to see how people reacted, with the correct response being to suspect you for it... so the suspicion of Noc was a test, and then the non-suspicion of Noc was a further test? How am I to know that this most recent FoS of Nocmen isn't another test, as opposed to being genuine this time? Constant application of these 'tests' basically puts you in a position where you can change your opinion to anything you want, in the vein of "Oh that last post was actually a test and you failed!" I would prefer a more transparent approach from you.

Not so much a test. After the first suspicion of nocmen, the following will, more often than not, be my true feelings on subjects. Walnut's post changed my opinion about him. I changed my mind, which shouldn't be a foriegn experience to anyone. Also, I'm usure as to why altering one's feelings about who is scum is bad. I'd think it worse to remain consistant. Afterall, that allows scum to predict your suspicions to better choose their nightkills to influence said suspicions.

That said, I still look at how people react to what I do and try to pick out their actions, because I know I may be wrong, and have tendencies toward paranoia as town.

So no, these were not "tests", but rather a switch in suspicion.
I currently believe nocmen and dourgrim to be scum.
However, I'm unsure of which to persue, as I have but 1 vote.

For now,
@Nocmen and Dourgrim: Comments on each other's play, please.

@BB: ??

He has a whole 5 posts. I've commented about his post before. He's one of hte people that hasn't contributed much.

[Nocmen]

113: This seems odd. There are a few lurkers in game so far, however BB is probably the most active of all the potential “lurkers.” Noc, why did you choose him to pressure, over say, Flame (

Mod: I don’t think he’s posted since confirm…prod please?

), Rice, Trumpet, or Dourgrim?

What can I say, I take notice to people whose posting screams out they are lurking.

132: This certainly seems like a blatant attempt to not scumhunt. Noc, couldn’t you have easily analyzed those 5 posts?

Yes, and of those 5 posts, there was only one that was worth commenting on, and I mentioned that I already commented on it.

[Nocmen]

Yes, and of those 5 posts, there was only one that was worth commenting on, and I mentioned that I already commented on it.

...
Anything to say about his posts NOT involving you?
ie. the rest of them

As of that time, the posts were 5 total, the first 3 which had little to no value at all, and the fifth that was merely an explanation of some of his actions.
His 6th post is to me, raising a debate of what your goal is to do in Mafia. He only has stated his playstyle there, and how it differs from yours. Though I am curious to see if he really will add more content as he claimed he would tomorrow.

Do you not like his mentality or take on Mafia?

[Nocmen]

I'm feeling a bit more confident and townie vibes from dourgrim now, but I'm not going to give him a free pass just yet.

RBT: I want to know your opinions on this game, not just a quick short post. You can think this out, because while you may not like hasty posts, you've had more than enough time to collect thoughts about this game.

[Nocmen]

It's just so easy to pull people up for something obvious like Omgus, as he did in his last post. His tone also seems quite assured ("care to redeem yourself before I'm completely convinced you're mafia?"), which makes me think he's planning to push further. Possible scum behaviour.

I think hes scummy, he could be scum.Perhaps I phrased 'before I'm completely convince' inappropriately. It was meant for pressure but I am not going to vote for him until more scumminess is revealed AFTER he answers all the questions his post brought up.

(I believe 3 people found that post EXTREMELY scummy, not just me)

Which post is this, and who all found that scummy?

Also, I'm curious to Issac seeming to follow magnus's vote here. But it is an early vote, and not a wagon, so I'm not too suspicious. But it is something to note for later.

[Nocmen]

Nocmen -36%- Though Noc's percentage is, admittedly, high, Nocmen has put fourth a substantial amount of effort in playing the game. The percentage is high because, as Isacc pointed out, she voted someone (me?) for lurking when flame has made, perhaps, 1 post. IAlso, a majority of his post seem to be spent not scum hunting but prodding lurkers, a terrible replacement for actual hunting.

1. Last time I checked, I had a penis.
2. I think I have been scum hunting, but I also feel that a lynch should not be made unless we hear from all of the players, soemthing that has not happened.
3. I'm voting you because of your active lurking as well as posts which somewhat concern me.

BB, I find it interesting that your results indicate that your two friends from a previous game are least scum-like. Do you believe it possible that your % approach favours a particular playstyle and has little relevance to scumminess? It might be time for a little reflection on that.

Right now, my sense is that magnus_orion has shown the most scum like play, but I am still trying to figure out what out of that might be attributable to his personal style. I am not interested in the Phily lynch. Look at his join date, note how he was pretty much the first person to voice an opinion on anything much and got slammed for it, then has tried to play it safe-ish from there. My read is more a new player than a scum player.

Defense of Philly noted.

I'm going to do a much more thourough look into Philly later today or tomorrow, I want to see his stuff before I judge the wagon fully.

[Nocmen]

@Dourgrim:

OMG BACKPEDAL

Fair enough. I want to hear what you have to say about other players.

He should concentrate on the more scummy of players if he wants to be considered pro-town.

Who are these "more scummy of players" that he should be concentrating on?

Wrong choice of words. He should concentrate on people that have a more solid ground for being scum.

LOL, the question was who, so reclarifying it doesn't make the question go away does it?

Stop not doing what the inner quote says.

So you had run out of reasons for attacking everyone until now and attacked Philly. You really don't care who gets lynched. Also by doing WIFOM, you have yet another scumtell.

Right, I don't care who gets lynched [/sarcasm] So, care to back that statement up? Because I want my suspects lynched.
Preferably philly, because I'm pretty sure he's scum.
Or do you disagree with that assessment?
I'd like to hear your reasoning on a few other players, besides me. (And including how I interact with them as the defining quality is unhelpful.)

It seems you have suspected nearly everyone in the game. So you want everyone lynched? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your assessment of philly being scum. I'll define other players later.

The jump from induction, to generalized statement, to more generalized statement is wacky.

"magnus has suspected a lot of players => magnus has suspected most of the players => magnus suspects all of the players." I don't like this movement of thinking at all.

I will say that I don't currently suspect walnut, and my suspicion on issac is purely conditional. And the condition being that I'm wrong. I also don't suspect nocmen as much after dourgrim's post on him, which sounds like he's had prior experience with nocmen.
Dourgrim is "iffy", I feel that his reads on players other than me will be valuable information into his alignment, information that has been lacking so far, so I don't really know, all I know is I dislike the points he's used against me.

So basically the only one I'm really okay with lynching at this point and time is phillyec.

Just had to say this before I go to sleep,
I have never played with dourgrim before to my knowledge. I don't remember him at all.

[Nocmen]

@nocmen: You noted my "defense" of Phily. What did you think of Riceballtail's explanation of BB's reasoning before BB had answered the question?

I did not see that. But that seems a bit strange, RBT, why of all the questions to answer, you answered one not directed towards you?

[Nocmen]

For that matter, he's been trying to make individual players suspicious of each other for much of the game, including apparently trying to make Nocmen look at RBT.

It's about consistency. If two players perform a similar action there needs to be a reason given why it is scummy for one of them but a null tell for the other. It makes the player think about why they commented the first time and justify the decision around whether to apply the same logic the second time.

I agree with this statement completely. Even I think it's bad play that so early in this game, we go and just ignore some players, and I will admit I've even been doing that, ignoring some of the peopole who havent psoted as much and gone after a few people. We should really make sure we get as many opionions in as possible before going and making the first lynch.

[Nocmen]

I'm also a bit wary of magnus trying to string lynches together by saying that Isacc is scummy if Phily is town. did you ever explain why that is the case, magnus?

Well, its about time somebody mentioned that. I was starting to think you'd all lost your heads.

1. Neither philly nor issac are lynch worthy at this point. If we were forced into making a lynch this instant with no further discussion, I'd go with philly. But we should interrogate the suspect, gather information on them, and collect data. This way we are better informed once we decide on a lynch.

2. Issac is scummy if philly flips town. Based on a few premises: That scum want to lynch asap, and that scum are afraid to push for this. I've played as scum, and I feel that there is a natural inclination toward finding something acceptable once a townie or two does it. Since I know I am town, Issac's reluctance to vote Philly upon post # 145, but he votes philly in his post # 166, directly following my post # 165 where I vote philly.

Wait...philly is not lynch worthy at this point, but you would lynch him if you had to? That makes little sense.

Though I do agree completely with the point you said about Issac.

I think we need to make a choice which of these we should test today.

Unvote,

, BB has proved a bit better to me.

[Nocmen]

Nocmen, get back here. With a series of minor posts, you've failed to advance the game and to contribute.

That's just hilarious. You're yelling at me to contribute, when you were the one that was bored when I had something close to a relevant discussion.

As of right now, I really don't have much suspicion. The perpetual walls are contributing to this though, as a lot of it seems to just be talking between each other and it doesn't look like a whole lot of focused scumhunting yet. It's there, but it's not focused.

I don't like this attitude. If you don't think theres enough scumhunting, you can try to do some on your own. Are you afraid of trying to scum hunt? Do you not want to?

Oh, I know it doesn't look like I am. But sometimes the best analyzing is done without questioning.

You do realize that if you are trying to appeal to us to make us understand your causes, you need to focus on a topic and push at it, trying to prove someone is scum? You just seem like you're going and trying to skim through, afraid of causing suspicion on yourself.

Vote: Riceballtail

[Nocmen]

@nocmen: You ever play a game with RBT? Also, in regard to your points on RBT, what about Mafiassk?

I have no played with him before. Mafia's post seem a bit different from his normal style, but I don't know, I'm not certain if I'm thinking of him as the same person I've played with a while back.

First of all, I hope everyone had a great Easter weekend.

I'm still pretty happy with where my vote is, especially considering Walnut's observation above.

So you're using others reasoning as a means for your votes?

That was an attack? Didn't look like one to me.

Yea...I think a vote and calling you scummy is an attack.

@Dourgrim: Hey, scum, do you have anything to say about players who are not me? Afraid of boxing yourself into a corner from your comments earlier on?

HOS: Dourgrim

Spin-doctor much? I haven't provided much analysis on the other players, I agree, but that's because I think I've presented a pretty good case on you that you still haven't refuted to my satisfaction.

You're a liar

... why should you (or your BS accusations) be trusted?

Your last post is my favorite scumtell. You're happy with your vote because it is against town, and you feel its been legetimized by someone else's comment. I am reasonably confident you're scum now.

No, I'm happy with my vote because you're not making any sense, and because another player besides me has successfully pointed out a flaw in your "case" that you didn't really refute well. You've gone around and FoS'd almost everyone in this game at this point, and you haven't built much of a case against anyone as far as I can tell, let alone me. Besides, if you're so sure I'm scum, why aren't you voting for me? Get over yourself.

Dour: Your play is still radically different. Granted, maybe you need someone like GIEFF to argue with, but I think your being exceedingly passive this game. Reason?

Have you not noticed magnus up there? I was arguing with him, posting quite a bit, and the reaction of the Town was pretty much the same: ignoring us. Why continue to blather on about magnus and his ridiculous "playstyle" if no one's interested? It didn't help last game, did it? You were convinced then that I was scum, so I'm trying to keep the thread noise down in this game to reduce the distractions to the Town. I guess in that way I am playing differently than last game... but also remember, in that last game I said that my work schedule has picked up considerably, and I have less time overall for posting. I'm keeping up with the game, I'm not lurking, I just am not posting walls of text anymore.

Honestly, itseems like you have a personal issue with Magus' playstyle. He seems like hes making reasonable discussion, and is definitely pushing towards it more than you have been. You yell at us for ignoring you, when you ignore everyone else?

I will attempt to post an in-depth analysis of every other player in the game within the next 24 hours, if for no other reason than I'm sick of listening to magnus babble.

Good, I want to see this.

Caf seems like aggressive scum. Caf wagon is a go!

Unvote vote caf

How is he more aggressive than others?

Caf seems like aggressive scum. Caf wagon is a go!

Unvote vote caf

Now this game gets interesting. Excellent.

You plan on posting anything relevant soon?

[Nocmen]

Ah. Sorry, I was under the impression you had accepted that I didn't lie outright. Though I still don't see how you can't. I do believe we have a deadline to meet... though I'm not sure on ts status.

@Nocmen: do you think dourgrim is scum?

I don't know. My gut first said he was overreacting, but now I'm not certain about that...

[Nocmen]

I'm here. Been a hectic two days. Going to try and get a nice post once I finish my work for today.

[Nocmen]

RBT, in post 316 you vote for Walnut. What are the reasons for your vote here?

Lurkervoting is not always the most productive course of action.

QFT. However, as I said in my previous post, we have a whole third of the town not contributing much, so I am in no hurry to lynch yet, and more keen to get them involved. The deadline is now less than a week away, and it is insane that someone can go the whole day without posting a single content post.

you actually be in favour of lynching Seraphim if he continued to lurk for the rest of the day?

Depends what else comes up, and if there was any chance of getting a lynch on him before deadline. If no one else was going anywhere near him, I wouldn't waste my vote there. I am a bit more suspicious of him than the average lurker on account of his making an active decision to replace into a game then lurking.

What's funny is that I have no idea what SSK see or is voting for. I was quite literally going for reactions.

"I have just done something scummy, but of course I did it on purpose". Similarly to when magnus did it early on, you get a reaction that says "That was scummy". It's a terrible defence.

@Isacc: Whether it is due to the frequency and timing of your posting or that you just happen to think similarly to other players, the majority of your posts say something that someone else has already said. Taking a look at post #310 as your most recent example, it essentially includes two points:

Prod gotten, and I haven't really been inactive, I just was hoping Philly would have posted by now, since he's my top suspect. This is getting pretty frustrating.

@MafiaSSK, and RBT: Wow -_-. Worst case ever lol.

First, that Phily hasn't posted (which magnus has already said). Secondly, that RBT and Mafia SSK have not presented a strong case (which I have already said. So, not so much an overgeneralisation, and it keeps you in my top three. Now that he is starting to post more, I am getting more of a scum vibe from RBT (see earlier in this post). I'll do some more thinking about who I would round out my top three with.

Actually, come to think of it, Walnut's last list should have included phillyec. Selectivity, much?
Walnut will have to explain this.

Fair point on Phily. I guess I felt I had a decent read on him from his early posts, but had overlooked that he has not posted much more recently.

Okay, I agree with your post for the first part, but after that, it seems like...you're going and talking about wasting votes? That just sounds like an attempt to bandwagon on someone...

Fair point on Phily. I guess I felt I had a decent read on him from his early posts, but had overlooked that he has not posted much more recently.

You overlooked it? But it was in your points against isacc, which were hinted at in the post where you left out philly. More selectivity.

How would noting that Isacc followed someone else's opinion on Phily have a direct correlation to whether I was keeping tabs on how much Phily had posted recently? I agree it would be suspicious for me to say that Isacc was repeating a point about Phily being absent then in a subsequent post say that I did not realise that Phily was absent. However, to make an argument out of saying it in the same post seems a bit unbelievable.

Unbelievable? I disagree.
As it stands, your defense involves the implication that the evidence for the case against issac made itself apparant after you accused him.
Then what lead you to accuse him of following people?
This evidence on isacc you present is invalid, because you could not have used it to reach your conclusion because, by your own admission, you hadn't noticed philly's lurking. So, give us the evidence that lead

you

to your conclusion of this generalization with respect to isacc.

I'm going to have to take magnus's side on this. You're arguements seems like you got caught with your pants down, and you're doing wahtever you can to deny it...

Well, y'know, nobody is going near him at the moment either. I guess I just don't see the utility of your vote and I think it could be better put to use elsewhere.

By leaving my vote on Seraphim and explaining why, I have drawn attention to the fact that Flame/Seraphim accounts for 2 (now 3) posts, for a total of "Hi, I am here", an in-joke with RBT, and now his most recent post to say he is still re-reading. That is insfufficient for a Day 1 contribution- we will go into Day 2 knowing nothing about him.

@Caf19, magnus:

those who have posted considerably and I have a slight positive read on, those who have posted considerably and I have a mild scum read on, and those who have not posted much at all.

Fair point on Phily. I guess I felt I had a decent read on him from his early posts, but had overlooked that he has not posted much more recently.

I see what you are getting at, but the answer is simple. I felt I had a decent read on him (which was largely that he was showing more newb than particularly scum); his not posting for a long time after that was not consistent with the read that I had made, so he fell more into the lurker category.
And if you think I am trying to be too agreeable, I should mention that BB's last post was worthy of American Idol- y'know, the early rounds where they show people who think they can sing but really can't.

@MafiaSSK: Go meta me. I live for defense. I consider it a better scumhunting tool than groundless accusations

Oh wow this is just classic. You stop being defensive when you have a vote on you?

It's okay Dour, but do try and give a well reasoned vote by Friday.

Unvote; Vote: Walnut

If Walnut is scum, Phily is 30% likely to be scum.

Magnus' forgetfulness to include Phily and his near passive play in reference to.

If Walnut isn't scum, I would suggest Caf19 is scum with Magnus Orion.

Magnus found, in his post on the last page, a question Caf asked that he called scummy. Caf never responded and Magnus never pursued it. This is scummy on both.

A third partner could be Dourgrim, but this is far less likely. (But a more likely third partner to those two than anyone else.)

If Magnus did coach Caf as my last post alludes to as a possibility, it could be infered that he reminded Caf of something along the lines of: Don't suspect Dour without reason, even though you know he's scum.

I may, to be honest, be reading too much into this, but these are my thoughts at the moment, and why, if we do not lynch Walnut, I will pursue Magnus/Caf19.

Noc feels faintly town. Isacc feels faintly town. Everyone else is still on the border line, which is almost as bad as being a suspect. As in, so far from being "town like," its like being suspected of murder.

Okay, I really see this argument, but I'm just a bit...uncertain with BB's other posts. I'm willing to let this slide for today, but I'm curious to see what happens once we lynch somebody.

Yeah, I'm still confident with my vote right now. I like the wagon progressing.

Is that all you have to say?

To keep my vote on RBT, or vote Walnut...I see both as good candiates for today's lynch.

[Nocmen]

Pretty uneventful day so far...and I'm very dissappointed that RBT came up town.