Newbie 810 - Game over!

[geekalicious]

FYI, 12Keyblade, I think the moogle avatar is cool. And I'm not sure on my policy about quick lynches yet. This is my first mafia game, and I just really want to ride it out and see how things go.

[geekalicious]

@12Keyblade
Neither, actually.

[geekalicious]

Everyone: What is your general play style and how many games have you played before? (If you've played lots I just need a quick estimate 20+, 50+. 100+, etc)

Well, I naturally don't have a playstyle yet... However, in general, I tend to be meticulous and very questioning, so I'm sure that'll transfer to here.

@12Keyblade

#1: I think that 98.7% of the time, random votes are random and off-the-wall (I h8 yer avatar, your name haz too mane Z's, etc.) However, if a bandwagon takes off from a random vote, either a scum player was the first and third vote, or they were second and third.

How did you establish your idea that a random vote from the first and third or the second and third player resulting in a bandwagon means that the pair is scum?

@KittyMo
Thanks for the game link.

[geekalicious]

Vote: TheFlyingGreenMonkey

I'm agreeing with ronnieroo and KittyMo's logic here. Voting no lynch, then claiming you don't like first day lynching, then reversing and retaliatory voting for KittyMo is not looking good on your part.

[geekalicious]

And to me two votes agianst one person seems like a cordnated attack. Just mentioning ;D

Well, considering that I referenced the posts of two other people and that 12Keyblade also asked you to explain your vote, that seems more like the suspicions of 4 people converging on you rather than just 2 who also happened to put their votes out there.

To me no lynching is logical as it keeps a townie alive((face the odds)).

Also, I'm not seeing how no lynch would be logical just to keep a townie alive. If we refuse to lynch anyone, then another innocent will die anyway and the proportion of the mafia present will only increase. Seems better to lynch and at least have a chance at killing one of the mafia.

[geekalicious]

ronnieroo simply noted a contradiction and brought it to our attention. You decided to run with this and KittyMo's accusation and bandwagon FGM. While I'm not saying FGM is scum, yet, taking two people's post out of context and using it to support your bandwagon vote is looking VERY scummy to me. FoS: geekalicious

@the 2nd quote block, seems like sound logic. However, while we need to lynch day one, I reiterate that it must be backed with reasonable suspicion, not just blindly jumping on a bandwagon. At this point, I don't think we are at that point.

I don't completely see how I was taking quotes out of context... ronnieroo pointed out a contradiction that I agree with. Therefore, I put my vote behind it. And as I note, 12keyblade did indeed place the finger of suspicion on TheFlyingGreenMonkey later. That doesn't really sound like a stretch of words to me.

Additionally, the purpose behind the vote wasn't to start an unjustified bandwagon (though, I must say, I don't think two votes is even really deserving of the title bandwagon at this point). I also wanted TheFlyingGreenMonkey to know how scummy the actions and lack of rationalization for his actions appeared to me. Perhaps pointing a FOS would have been better, but at this point, I'm still not quite satisfied with his explanation of not knowing the rules and roles of this particular variation which were posted by the mod at the very beginning of the thread to stop confusion like that, so my vote will stand for now.

[geekalicious]

Sorry to double post, but I just noted something else I wanted to ask about. At the beginning of the game, TheReverendPsycho, you put this up:

VOTE: 12Keyblade

For holding up the start of the game.

However, later on when 12Keyblade voted for you, you said,

OMGUS vote. Hmm...possibly attempting to make this vote "look" random. Also, tossing the finger at FGM about him being the last one to confirm seems awkward.

How can you say that tossing the finger at TheFlyingGreenMonkey for confirming last is awkward (though, the finger actually seemed to be pointed for his suspicious voting habits) when at the beginning of the day, you cited that as your random voting logic for aiming at 12Keyblade?

[geekalicious]

just cus im going with the crowd:

Vote: KittyMo

BlueRaven, voting for another player and placing them at L-2 without any other justification than just going with the crowd is looking like an awfully scummy thing to do to me. Additionally, I've noted that you're the person with the least amount of commentary in the game thus far. Though I'm still watching TheFlyingGreenMonkey, I'm going to change my vote.

Unvote Vote: BlueRaven

[geekalicious]

In my previous post I felt that geek took keyblade's simple question to FGM to explain his reasoning as suspicion. He also used ronnieroo's noting of a contradiction in FGM's logic as support for his vote on FGM. Upon 2nd reading, that DOES seem to make sense. Still, IMO, I don't think simply asking someone to explain their No Lynch vote is necessarily an act of suspicion. Then, in an effort to further support his reasoning, he states that 12keyblade did place an FoS on FGM. While that is true, geek's vote on FGM came before keyblade's FoS post.

I'm finally starting to see how I possibly mis-quoted. Yes, 12Keyblade pointed his FoS at TheFlyingGreenMonkey after I made the post. However, I make the assumption that if something about a post is causing you to query about it, then suspicion must be aroused on some basic level at least. So maybe we're having a disagreement on what counts as someone being suspicious.

And BlueRaven, I'm also going to ask for some real justification for your vote. Your post sequence on this page did not shed any light at all.

[geekalicious]

what is there to explain? Im a nwb, i say something wrong. making me look like a scum. simple as realy...

>_< *head desk*

BlueRaven, I'm also a complete newbie to this, but it's not stopping me from validating my actions when need be. And I definitely think you should answer KittyMo's questions. The first one takes some of the heat off of you and lets you talk about a different topic besides your highly suspect vote.

[geekalicious]

2) Yes i can. I was being brain-dead acting on spur of the moment being a nwb. But that has changed (i hope) seeing ive been putting time into reading some guides.

I can believe that you made a newbie mistake and had a brain dead moment. However, you had obviously been doing some reading before now as you admitted:

ac.... dam.... thats not good... i read a poll earlyer saying about a newbie mistake... i think im the person that just slipped up and did the newbie mistake.

And what sort of poll would most likely say that's a newbie mistake for a role but a poll on how newbies play mafia in the game (though, yes, it could admittedly be in a poll about general newbie mistakes)? So I'm still inclined to believe that you had a brain dead newb moment where you revealed yourself in doing something scummy rather than just making a more innocent newb mistake like what I now suspect TheFlyingGreenMonkey was doing... Especially when I re-analyze him voting for himself and then asking to leave the game, he's really looking like a newb that got extremely flustered.

[geekalicious]

I am suspicious of both votes, most particularly geekalicious' especially because he quickly transitions into an opportunistic Blueraven vote.

Anyway, Blueraven does look a little bit fishy to me, but I am weary of the speed of the bandwagon that formed on him. My gut is telling me that scum are driving this bandwagon.

The primary reason for the wagon forming against BlueRaven has been his consistent lack of contribution to the conversation, the lack of vote rationalization besides "I'm a noob!", and the fact that he jumped onto a KittyMo vote just for the sole reason that she had the most votes (besides TheFlyingGreenMonkey, which he conveniently didn't vote for even though he had generated much more discussion).

Additionally, in reference to my votes thus far, the first vote according to TheFlyingGreenMoneky was in coordination with KittyMo. This vote for BlueRaven, if in coordination with anyone, would be me with Krauthammer. I'm seriously doubting that I'd have the sudden ability to switch scum buddies to coordinate the attack. In both cases, I have added my vote because the players had exhibited scum behavior and having a two votes on them seemed like a proper impetus to push them into discussing their actions without seriously threatening them.

[geekalicious]

If I presume you scum for the purposes of this post, where is it said that the people you are coordinating votes with have to be your scumbuddies? It could well be just as possible that as scum you could be weaving connections with townies to drag them down in a web of suspicious behavior if you ever flipped scum on a lynch.

Since you said that you found "both" votes for TheFlyingGreenMonkey suspicious and also that you thought scum was driving the current possible BlueRaven lynch, I inferred that you thought I was scum and at least one of the people who I'd had my vote with so far was also scum.

[geekalicious]

It is possible for more than 2 people to be suspicious in a given game where there are two scum. (If this wasn't true, townies would never get lynched.)

No, no, that's not what I'm trying to argue with. I can definitely see how more than 2 people in a game can appear suspicious. In your previous posts, perhaps I misread you in the way your were casting suspicion about how two votes (which, I'll state again, I don't consider a bandwagon) were placed upon TheFlyingGreenMonkey and BlueRaven.

My main point going into this line of thought is that both people I've voted for thus far have been obviously suspect and that's why I voted for them. Plain and simple.

Finally, the odd behavior of your predecessor and the way you're suddenly voting for me are making me suspicious right now.

[geekalicious]

In the post previous to your vote, I had written:

Since you said that you found "both" votes for TheFlyingGreenMonkey suspicious and also that you thought scum was driving the current possible BlueRaven lynch, I inferred that you thought I was scum and at least one of the people who I'd had my vote with so far was also scum.

However, you replied with

I see what you're trying to do. You're trying to say that I think more than 2 people are scum in an attempt to discredit my suspicions.

Nothing in that post said I was trying to discredit you with the argument that more than two people are suspicious. I was just acknowledging that you might be finding multiple people suspicious. You blew it out of proportion and voted for me.

Additionally, I'm already starting to get tired of the "It's a newbie thing" argument. It allows players to get away with otherwise complete scum bag actions, and I'm just not buying it in all the situations it's being cited in.

[geekalicious]

You just admitted you're following others. This makes me very suspicous of you. Just because someone is "obviously a suspect" doesn't mean that they're mafia. Thinking for yourself is always the best way to go in a game like this. If you follow others you risk following a mafia member. Listen to other peoples arguments, express your own thoughts, and vote only after thinking it through.

I'm not following others. I look at the person's actions, I look at points that others have brought up about them, and then I take the action I see fit. In the case of TheFlyingGreenMonkey, I looked at his action of voting for no lynch then at his lack of defense other than not understanding the rules and then voted for him. Similar case with BlueRaven. BlueRaven had posted the least amount of game content then voted for KittyMo just for the sake of voting for the person with the most votes. This appears incredibly scummy to me, which is why my vote on BlueRaven stands. Just because I voted for the person whose actions were incriminating enough to make them obviously suspect at this point in the game != following the crowd. I judge the person first and foremost on their own actions before looking at the opinions of others to back my own conclusions.

[geekalicious]

I'm not following others. I look at the person's actions, I look at points that others have brought up about them, and then I take the action I see fit.

How is that a contradiction....?

Action list as can be seen from post snippet:
1. MY THOUGHT by looking at the person's actions.
2. Look at other's thoughts (I mean, if I wasn't going to look at other's thoughts to help fuel my thought process at all, what would be the point of reading a lot of the posts on the board?)
3. My action

[geekalicious]

Um, 12Keyblade, where's the analysis of yourself?

[geekalicious]

12Keyblade
Post 7-Votes for reverendpsycho after reverendpyscho votes for him
Post 37-Places FOS on TheFlyingGreenMonkey for voting no lynch on D1
Post 49-Places FOS on xRECKONERx for for possibly trying to stifle discussion
Post 69-Places FOS on BlueRaven after BlueRaven votes for KittyMo
Post 92-Defends random vote on reverendpsycho as being random
Post 118-Unvotes
Post 138-Places vote on BlueRaven after BlueRaven's explanation, claiming only "Still not satisfied" (though he has consistently asked for more explanation for other's actions) and places BlueRaven at L-2
Post 166-174-Goes through each player except self and gives place on Scum-O-Meter

Scum-O-Meter: 4

[geekalicious]

12Keyblade, when you were analyzing reverendpsycho, you wrote:

Post 39: Calls my random vote on him an OMGUS b/c I clarified that I wasn’t last. Says I tossed a finger at TFGM. I didn’t. Also asks TFGM to explain his No Lynch vote, after quoting a post from me explaining a situation where it may work in the town’s favor.

You did indeed toss a FOS at TFGM in post 37 as I noted when I did my analysis of you. Contradictory?

[geekalicious]

I'm sensing a general hatred for my Scum-O-Meter (patent pending). Why is that? Do you have a better solution/what are your own opinions?

Well, there are some advantages and disadvantages to your Scum-O-Meter.

Advantages:
-Helps sum up what's happened so far in the game. With more posts, it's been getting harder to keep track of all the details.
-Helps facilitate discussion.
-Lets townies know if their actions are coming off as very scummy so that they can defend themselves and/or modify style to be less scummy.

Disadvantages:
-Some of the commentary you inserted wasn't very pro-town (such as implying that KittyMo could be a cop).
-Lets scum know if their actions are coming off as very scummy so that they can defend themselves and/or modify style to be less scummy.

Kind of a double edged sword.

[geekalicious]

@Zachrulez, why are you whip-lashing your vote around so much? You quickly go from voting for me to voting for 12Keyblade to now voting for xRECKONERx. This doesn't so look much like meticulous scum hunting/ pressure voting to me as it seems like you just finding someone else to blame on the spur of the moment.

[geekalicious]

Oh, just putting it out there, but BlueRaven hasn't posted in a while... BlueRaven, would you mind commenting on the most recent series of posts?

[geekalicious]

Currently on Raven's wagon are (Krauthammer, Geek, and Keyblade)

You've already said you think Geek is town, and you can't get a good read on Key, so... Kraut?

So... yes, you did ask xRECKONERx about Krauthammer.

[geekalicious]

Also, deliberately avoiding questions is scummy, no matter how you try to justify it. That's exactly what Reckoner is doing right now. (Geek is contributing by trying to get him out of answering the question.)

Eh....? How am I trying to get xRECKONERx out of answering the question? All I mentioned earlier was that you did indeed ask him a question.

[geekalicious]

Alright, everybody's checked in on the thread at least except Krauthammer and he hasn't posted since Sunday with today being Thursday....

Mod, can we get a prod on Krauthammer?

[geekalicious]

Is there anything specific that you want from Kraut?

I'm mostly concerned that he hasn't posted in what is now five days. He may need to be replaced out if he doesn't respond.

[geekalicious]

Here's my perspective on Krauthammer looking at the posts.

Krauthammer does quickly vote for BlueRaven then ask for an explanation. He seems to have done this to get BlueRaven to respond since when more votes came onto BlueRaven he said

Yeah, BlueRaven is as scummy as all hell, but no one else vote for him for now, we don't want this to end before it has to.

So he doesn't seem to rush right into a full out bandwagon, wanting to give BlueRaven time to respond. Additionally, Krauthammer gives BlueRaven some newbie slack when he says:

I'm keeping the vote on now, as there still isn't anyone as skummy out there to my eyes, but the lack of answer is making me think he thought it was still joke phase? If you do anything that's townie at all (contribution, anything) I'll unvote you.

He gives BlueRaven the mercy of him possibly thinking it's joke phase and agrees to take the vote off if BlueRaven acts more pro-town.

Later, however, he does continue to keep pressure on BlueRaven by leaving his vote placed on BlueRaven when a satisfactory explanation isn't forthcoming. As Zachrulez mentioned in his analysis, Krauthammer also thinks that BlueRaven has an equal chance of being townie or scum. If this is what Krauthammer truly thinks, then he should have called the vote off of BlueRaven which makes the lack of unvote rather suspect.

So my basic thought on Krauthammer is that he is leaning toward the scum side. However, his attempts to get BlueRaven to respond early on and attempts to give BlueRaven some newb mercy make me dis-inclined to vote for him... yet. I really wanted to see more content from him so I could make a fuller decision....

I've also had a second look at Geek and think I might have overreacted on his actions, and also that my perception of him might be a little biased since he had attacked my player slot.

Hm, are you saying you had a partially OMGUS vote/ bias out on me?

I do, however, want to lynch one of the three on the Raven wagon today, so Unvote while I decide who it'll be.

Eh? Why a sudden rush to vote for lynch?

[geekalicious]

What makes you think there's a rush to lynch?

/puttingwordsinmymouth

Well, you did say that you wanted to lynch one of the three "today." That seems a tad hasty when the deadline isn't until the 22nd if I recall correctly.

[geekalicious]

Today is referencing this game day. As in Day 1 of the game.

Ah.... Alright, I see now. Thanks for the correction.

[geekalicious]

That was an interesting exchange.

How so?

[geekalicious]

I'm going to have to go back through the posts and do an analysis to name my #3. For now, I'd like to

Unvote

though. BlueRaven has recently actually started contributing to the conversation instead of lurking vaguely behind the "I'm a newbie excuse." Though BlueRaven's initial screw-ups still have him on my radar, the case against him doesn't feel as strong now.

[geekalicious]

Ronnie, his "logic" is that you have extra info that tells you there's two mafia goons.

I want to see what Zachrulez himself says about the matter, but I suspect that this is his logic.

Looking at what ronnieroo posted, I mostly see it as a general phrase rather than as a specific slip admitting knowledge. However, ronnieroo is my #3 person looking back through the posts. She generally doesn't post that much, and I'm waiting to see if her post truly is a scumslip before I would rate her higher.

[geekalicious]

Hello, illiniguy09. Nice to have you in the game. In addition to whatever general commentary you have to make, can you give your opinion of the extended post by Zachrulez that led to him voting for your predecessor Krauthammer?

Oh, and reverendpsycho, also glad to see you back. Hope that all is well for you.

[geekalicious]

I'm still not sure about the case against ronnieroo you outlined, Zachrulez.... She just mostly seems to be analyzing the game and putting points out there for others to analyze in the posts you noted.

[geekalicious]

Zachrulez, within the span of about 10 pages, you've switched your vote from me to 12Keyblade to xRECKONERx to Krauthammer to ronnieroo. I looked through a decent part of that game you cited, and you weren't fishtailing your vote nearly this much at least not on Day 1.

In the case of your vote on Krauthammer, there was indeed the suspicious action of Krauthammer not changing his vote when he thought there was an equal chance of BlueRaven being town or mafia. However, the rest of your case against him is a stretch as you can see I don't completely agree with you in my Post 320.

In your attack against ronnieroo, you do something similar to your extended analysis of Krauthammer. You see one definite scumtell commited (in this case, her saying there are mafia goons, implying a knowledge of the roles). But, overall, the rest of your case against her is weak. The weakest point against her came at the end of your analysis:

Just to let you all know, I will have no interenet connection at all from the 13-18. I don't know if that requires a replacement or not.

Makes excuse for lurking.

You basically attack another player for taking V/LA which appears rather scummy to me. She even explained later that she will be doing something with her church during that period of time.

Even when voting for me, you seemed completely convinced that I was scum only to later admit:

I've also had a second look at Geek and think I might have overreacted on his actions, and also that my perception of him might be a little biased since he had attacked my player slot.

When I press you about the point about you having a partial OMGUS bias on me you just say that it's

Kind of a gray area. I am analyzing your attacks on the player I replaced with knowledge of that particular players alignments.

Saying that YOU know the player's alignment is not a true argument since we are not also privy to this knowledge. It's just a comment that confirms for me that you aren't meticulously scum hunting but trying to pin the blame on someone else.

Vote: Zachrulez

[geekalicious]

EBWOP: Sorry, last point against ronnieroo argument was a misquote. For some reason, didn't see the first part of what she wrote which was:

I'm here. Like I said I don't say anything unless I have something useful to say.
(And just to clear it up, I am a she...)

Maybe the bold put me off.... Anyway, rest of my argument still stands.

[geekalicious]

Lol, I just noted it at the same time you did..... Yes, I'm sorry for that one.

[geekalicious]

Forgive me if I have a dialup internet connection (thus why I didn't note that you had corrected me first....), and also that I chose to go get myself an energy drink and some breakfast before coming back and noting my error.

[geekalicious]

Besides that one clear error (which I'm definitely admitting was an accidental misquote on my part and it shouldnt be included with the rest of the piece), what do you think about the rest of my post against you?

[geekalicious]

Other than the point about me switching my vote which is based on meta which lacks an example of where I voted like that as scum?

That's the point. You're claiming that you're town here like you were in that game that you personally cited but I looked through the game, and I don't see you voting like you're voting here.

Other than the point about you claiming my vote was OMGUS despite the fact that you were voting Blueraven at the time?

Alright, I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean. I still held heavy suspicions of BlueRaven being scum. Additionally, that was not an OMGUS vote in any way.

Feel free to refute my case against Ronnieroo at any time, rather than just summarily dismissing the points as weak.

Alright, I'll go through the post now.

I spy with my little eye... a condradiction.

You said it the above post Quote:

I don't like first day random kills

And then when KittyMo votes for you, you vote for her "for voting for you". That isn't exactly random... but it still doesn't strike me as well thought out or logical. It appears to me to be a joke vote, which you say you don't approve of.

I personally think that things can be observed from someones day one vote. Even if we don't nail a mafia member we still can observe who voted for who, and in this case, who voted no lynch.

Points out contradiction made by TFGM early in the game. Is careful not to take strong position against TFGM. Does not vote.

Not voting for TFGM was not a scum tell. The main thing that made others suspicious of TFGM was his voting for No Lynch on Day 1. You even in one of your posts said:

I'm sorry to say, but supporting no lynch in a newbie game is not necessarily scummy. It's a newbie thing, and it's precisely the reason we have newbie games and ICs, so that we can explain to those players that it's not a wise move.

In the next part of your post you wrote:

0.o

How does it seem like a coordinated attack?
Even if it is, there aren't enough mafia members to cause a lynch on their own. They would have to get someone to follow them. geek is a new member (I think), so naturally he's going to follow. The following does worry me though. I don't like to feel like someone is jumping on a band wagon.
If GreenMonkey is innocent then my suspicions would move over to either KittyMo or geek. Currently the contradiction and vote for no lynch naturally bring me to suspect you though GreenMonkey.

The biggest thing wrong in this post is that Ronnie points out that mafia can't get a lynch on their own, and that they need to get people to follow them. By this logic, followers are town, but she tries to lay a condition out to cast suspicion on Geek and Kittymo. Strangely though, she makes it a point to call geek a follower...

This is a classic waiting in the wings to blame people for a mislynch.

This is also not a scum tell. ronnieroo mainly points out that following is a thing that seems to be occuring in this particular game and lets players know that mafia may be behind an attempt to lynch someone. Later, she does call me a potential follower. However, the post doesn't naturally imply that all followers are innocent.

My eye currently falls on BlueRaven.

It sounds like you're saying that by not defending that makes you town. Well that is a very very bad defense. For one thing, I think you may be using it to fall back on. If you're town (particularly if you have power role) you should fight to stay alive. You've contributed nothing. Your posts are confusing. All of this looks very scummy to me. I've never really bought the "I'm a noob" excuse. Can you please answer KittyMo's questions? If you answer them well it might help convince me of your innocence.

Kitty Mo where did you hear that lynch only if the numbers are odd? Do you think that that is a good idea? I really am going to have to say I don't.

Suspicions flip to Blueraven. Never states if or how this changes her read of TFGM. Doesn't vote. Not voting here is more striking cause she states that Blueraven is very scummy.

Well, no one asked her to say how this affected her read on TFGM, so she probably just didn't think to post anything about it. Additionally, though she says that BlueRaven is looking very scummy, she's clearly waiting for BlueRaven to answer KittyMo's questions before she takes further action.

My main point going into this line of thought is that both people I've voted for thus far have been obviously suspect and that's why I voted for them. Plain and simple.

You just admitted you're following others. This makes me very suspicous of you. Just because someone is "obviously a suspect" doesn't mean that they're mafia. Thinking for yourself is always the best way to go in a game like this. If you follow others you risk following a mafia member. Listen to other peoples arguments, express your own thoughts, and vote only after thinking it through.

Fixed the quote from the original post first off. Attacks Geek for "following others." Apparently the logic for this being scummy is the danger of following a mafia member. This stinks of Ronnieroo knowing Geek's alignment.

That post does not stink of her knowing my alignment. She could just as likely be a concerned townie that's afraid a lynch wagon could be forming from someone else (in this case, me) blindly following a mafia.

KeyBlade... Suggesting that someone hinted at the fact that they were cop is a bad idea... Especially if it wasn't an obvious hint. When I read that at first I, too, thought it may've been a hint, but when I re-read it I came to the conclusion that KittyMo meant "investigation" by re-reading the thread and re-evaluating her thinking. If KittyMo is the cop having her night killed would be very bad for town. If she isn't, and she's night killed it's still bad for town. It's possible that she's mafia throwing that comment out there to make the townies think she's innocent.

I feel as if Zach is controling the game at this moment. Leading sheep to water is ridiculously easy in a noobie game... especially when you're an IC. I'm not in ANYWAY saying don't listen to Zach. I'm saying make sure that you're thinking for yourself and not just following the logic of others. It's fine to agree... just don't blindly follow.

xRECKONERx... you don't even remember who you voted for? That shows how much attention you've been paying... Not remembering who you voted/denying voting for someone you did vote for makes me very suspicous of you. Forgetful or scummy? Hmm...

Just a few thoughts.

Deflates Keyblade's breadcrumb observation of Kittymo. Tries to distance from the possibility of her being a cop. Makes sure to point out that KittyMo could be bread crumbing as mafia.

Casts suspicion on me for "controlling the game". Tries to have it both ways by saying that she's not ACTUALLY trying to say not to listen to me though.

Casts suspicion on Reckoner for not paying attention. Does not commit to whether the behavior is scummy or not.

Yes, KittyMo could have been a breadcrumbing mafia. Nothing suspicious about ronnieroo noting that.

Additionally, you do tend to have a sort of aggressive style (at least I've noticed it in this game such as when you interogated xRECKONERx for about a about a page). I don't necessarily agree with her point that you're controlling the game, but she does admit later that maybe it's just

@Zach I feel as though you're leading because people are following you. If you look back at the thread you'll see that people follow your logic without really thinking for themselves. (Or at least that's how it looks to me... Maybe they just aren't stating their own thoughts)

So.... Looking at most of that post about ronnieroo, the only true evidence you seem to have against her is her possible scumslip in saying "mafia goons", not all the rest of what you posted.

Finally, I'm just going to put it out there again that I wasn't trying to misquote you, and I apologize for accidentally doing so. As you can see from my analysis above, I have plenty of issues with that particular post so that I wouldn't feel the need to misquote you as evidence.

[geekalicious]

I already explained how Geek misquoted me.

It doesn't change the case on Ronnieroo.

But I can easily back lynching either one to be honest.

But only about 20 posts ago you said:

Not no matter what as an absolute. I don't see it likely that a more compelling case is going to come at this point to convince me to vote for anyone else though.

Hm.....

[geekalicious]

Are you saying you're being intentionally scummy so that you can make me eat those words?

That's not a good argument if you're trying to discredit me.

Eh??? I'm not being scummy (unless you count that unfortunate misquoting which I will again apologize for). I've organized two posts stating why I've voted for you, one that features a full analysis of your analysis of ronnieroo.

I hold a firm position and I'm attacked for that.

And I'm not arguing against you for that. However, you saying that you didn't really imagine forming a strong case against anyone else on one page then on the next page saying you could just as easily lynch me or ronnieroo is looking wrong.

[geekalicious]

If that's the case, you should just lynch me now.

You have no idea how many times I've heard people say that to the inevitable lynch no matter what they say.

It's very obvious that I'm not going to be able to help you guys in catching scum because you're not going to listen to a word I say or allow me to change my mind.

There's really no point in me saying anything more.

...

Seriously, Zachrulez, you only have two votes on you, and you're already resorting to that sort of attitude instead of defending yourself?

[geekalicious]

Yeah, stop gloating scum, there's a good chance you're gonna get your mislynch.

Zachrulez, why are you being so bitter? You're an IC, you should be used to the process of defending yourself.

I'm not gloating at all. I just want you to play the game and defend yourself instead of giving up.

[geekalicious]

Everyone:
1) What do you think of my case?
2) Do you think we should wait until 12Keyblade and ronnieroo get back until we lynch anyone?
3) Who do you think is the best lynch candidate for today?

1. I think your case is plausible. It's similar to my problems with Zachrulez, though you did state it more coherently.
2. It seems like the appropriate thing to do. We don't want to rush things before we've heard their voices. There may be the possibility that 12Keyblade may want to change his vote.
3. Well, my vote is on Zachrulez, so....

[geekalicious]

KittyMo says: What do you think about my case?

Geekalicious says: OMG! That's exactly what I was thinking! You're so smart Kitty!

My feelings are that a scum is buddying up to you.

I'm not even sure what to say about this... I brought up my points against you first and even did a full analysis of your analysis on ronnieroo before KittyMo did. All I said was that I agreed with her points (when she specifically asked for our opinions) and now suddenly I'm trying to scum buddy with her?

[geekalicious]

3) Who do you think is the best lynch candidate for today?
- Zach or Geek. Geek's buddying is getting ridiculous.

Alright, xRECKONERx, since the pressure of votes is bothering Zachrulez right now and he didn't respond to my post, can you tell me how I'm buddying? I'm really at a loss about how that impression is coming off.... As I said only a few posts ago,

I'm not even sure what to say about this... I brought up my points against you first and even did a full analysis of your analysis on ronnieroo before KittyMo did. All I said was that I agreed with her points (when she specifically asked for our opinions) and now suddenly I'm trying to scum buddy with her?

[geekalicious]

Because it seems like you try to "pal" up to each person. You did it to me earlier, I know that much, and it appears you're doing it again now with Kitty. I just don't see you going out on your own on a limb as much as you back others up instead.

Alright, wtf? I clearly launched my case against Zachrulez first, but

I'm

obviously the one that's buddy up? That's just ridiculous. I only put that I agreed with her case when she asked me and admitted that it was better written. You even agreed yourself that it was the soundest case presented so far.

Additionally, I don't quite recall when I was supposedly buddying with you.... Can you cite the specific incident?

[geekalicious]

Oh great.... Both of our IC's are dead.... >_<

And illiniguy09, I do want to know why you hammered Zachrulez when we agreed to not do anything until 12Keyblade and ronnieroo had come back. Their discussion could have shed some light on Zachrulez and maybe changed the tide of the vote so that we didn't end up lynching an innocent.

[geekalicious]

Vote: Zachrulez
- Has made weak cases and voted for several people. Seemed to be trying to frame someone.

- Refusing to role claim.

What bothers me about this post is that you don't go into any real detail about your reason for hammering another player... Additionally, I already explained the whole misquoting thing. I really, really didn't mean to do that. It was accidental. My case against Zachrulez was based on more than the one section I misquoted (ie, his weak cases against other players and his habit of whiplashing his vote around alot which seemed like he was trying to cast suspicion on every player without firm reasoning). Are there any other reasons for you suspecting me?

And 3 asides:
1. I've been checking on our mod's posts lately, and, I'm not sure, but I think he's going to be on a leave for 7 days...
2. When did I go from being referred to as "she" instead of a "he," lol? I honestly don't care, I'm just curious.
3. Yes, HP 6 is fantabulous. I actually went to see it during the midnight release.

[geekalicious]

Oh, shoot, nevermind about that first aside. I think I misread a post where I think Vel is going to be taking over for another moderator for a week....

[geekalicious]

I've also been considering what to talk about.... I really want to know what's going on with reverendpsycho, but I suspect that he's disappeared for good. illiniguy09 has yet to reply to any of our questions which is rather frustrating.

The only commentary that I can make is that I think that at least 12Keyblade and/or ronnieroo is cleared from being scum since they were both on V/LA during the period of time when night actions needed to be submitted. That means that at least one scum (or perhaps both) was definitely in town during the period to submit a night kill.

I'd like to direct a question to everyone right now: Besides illiniguy09, who do you currently find most suspicious in the game and why?

[geekalicious]

Oh, and

mod, reverendpsycho hasn't posted anything since July 12....

[geekalicious]

What I see here, is KittyMo accusing TFGM for spite-voting, yet you not giving that same warning to Key who had committed the same crime and in the same severity. KittyMo decided to only acknowledge how 'OMGUS is scummy' when she became involved in the voting process.

Vote: KittyMo

The interaction between reverendpsycho and 12Keyblade was not in the same severity as what happened between KittyMo and TheFlyingGreenMonkey. The first interaction included playful beginning of the game banter and occured on the very first page. The KittyMo-TheFlyingGreenMonkey situation occured on the second page and happened after KittyMo voted for TheFlyingGreenMonkey because he had done some legitimate scumtell. Therefore, the first vote set mentioned was more random and playful, while the second was more OMGUS on the part of TheFlyingGreenMonkey.

[geekalicious]

@Monsieur: I can see your point about KittyMo now. I still personally wouldn't classify the votes on the same level, but I do see what you're saying.

Why are you whip-lashing your vote, Geek?

I was using my votes in the case of TheFlyingGreenMonkey and BlueRaven as pressure votes that I withdrew when answers were forthcoming or, in the case of BlueRaven, when he started contributing to the discussion. With Zachrulez, I feel like I took more time to analyze him over a series of time and then built a case up against him based on multiple points. He had launched full out attacks on five players (me, 12Keyblade, xRECKONERx, Krauthammer, ronnieroo) that weren't based on sound logic and seemed like he was trying to put the blame on someone else, so I felt justified in my vote for him especially since he later refused to even really deny the claims or role claim at the end. Also, keep in mind that this is my first game, so my game style is likely to change over the course of the game. I've been trying to be more careful in my analysis to try and avoid mislynching another innocent.

I find it ironic that in this post, you seem to be surprised that Zach is accusing you of scum-buddying with Kitty. Yet, you respond to my post voting for Kitty, even rationalize her actions and yet you had no correlation to my post whatsoever.

I was genuinely surprised that Zachrulez accused me of scumbuddying. However, I don't see how that's related to your second point... No, your post wasn't related to me, but I see it as my job in scum-hunting to point out contradictions I see in posts, even if those posts aren't aimed at me. I based my case on Zachrulez on him using faulty logic and stretching posts to make it seem like others were being scummy. It's sort of natural for me to point out what I saw as a contradiction in your post.

It's kinda late, so this might be spammy, but ATM geek's at L-2. Content in the morning.

No, I think I'm at L-3. illiniguy09 and Monsieur are the only votes that I see.

[geekalicious]

*head desk* Sorry, 12Keyblade.... I forgot that it's 4 to lynch now. Thanks for the reminder.

[geekalicious]

Care to expound that thought on "pressure voting"?

More or less, what it is, how you executed that in the thread, and what you've accomplished with it?

Well, the line of thought for me on that was that answers about questions would be more forthcoming from players about the allegations if I voted for them. However, I've since seen that this isn't always the best strategy and that I should probably have waited and seen more actions/ simply used a FOS before I voted.

I'm more inclined to vote for geek, as BlueRaven SOUNDS like a newbie.

So wait. Since I try to really look for scum and back my conclusions up with explanations in well-formatted posts and thus don't SOUND like a newbie, that means you're more likely to vote for me? Wow...

[geekalicious]

Since then, posting has dropped off from BlueRaven (can you drop from nothing?), geek has slightly dropped, and I've kept about the same.

Yes.... I've noted that both BlueRaven and ronnieroo don't post very much.

[geekalicious]

What's the difference between your pressure voting and Zach's?

I can answer this question.

1. Don't pose a question to me then answer it yourself. That's just rude.

Looking back on day one, there is one significant difference between the use of your vote and the use of Zach's vote. Your vote was used to support arguments that weren't your own; you never went out of your way to contribute different reasons, rather you parroted others.
On the other hand, Zach was willing to start new wagons and back it up with his thought process, whether weak or otherwise. You claim that your voting was used to attempt to make players be more forthcoming with their answers.

No.

If anything, you impeded that from happening by voting to lynch Zach.
Zach's votes were reaction testers. His game play was reactionary and the interactions with the people whom he argued with could provide to be useful.

2. Yes, Zachrulez used his votes are reaction testers. However, as you'll note, that strategy made him look like scum and got him lynched when he was just an innocent. That's why I deliberately mentioned (with bold added):

Well, the line of thought for me on that was that answers about questions would be more forthcoming from players about the allegations if I voted for them.

However, I've since seen that this isn't always the best strategy and that I should probably have waited and seen more actions/ simply used a FOS before I voted.

I'm basically admitting to you that my first two votes were based on only one major scumtell early in the game on the part of TheFlyingGreenMonkey and BlueRaven, and that I probably should have waited it out and seen more about the players before I cast my vote. I'm trying to be more meticulous and weigh my cases out better now, something you can see when I cast my vote against Zachrulez.

Additionally, I also suspect that scum was on Zachrulez's wagon. However, my progress in sniffing out scum is being somewhat impeded by the fact that illiniguy09 (my main suspect at the moment) hasn't posted anymore content in reply to my suspicions.

Finally, 12Keyblade, I noted that you've posted in the thread but you didn't reply to my comment about the way your voting is leaning based on how a player "sounds." Would you mind commenting?

[geekalicious]

btw why would i want to kill reckoner? he was defending me more than trying to lynch me. and the case illini brought up wasnt very strong in my opinion, it just covered all the old pointers about me which we've all seen before...

I agree that illiniguy09's case against you wasn't the strongest and was based on content early in the game. But BlueRaven, you aren't giving us a lot of content to work with besides your 1-2 line posts....

[geekalicious]

Sorry, guys, I'll get back on the posting ball soon. I've been sick the past couple of days...

[geekalicious]

This (with bold added):

12Keyblade: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:58 pm

BlueRaven: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:39 pm

geekalicious: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:46 pm

illiniguy09: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:16 pm
KittyMo: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:17 pm
Monsieur: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:26 am
ronnieroo: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:15 pm

Coupled with this:

2. It's possible his lurking can be attributed to panicking.

12Keyblade, you hadn't posted in the thread since about the same time I had, but I'm the one lurking and "panicking." Uh. Huh. However, I note going through your post history that you were posting in other places such as General Discussion and the Queue after that time. Were you the one "panicking" in this thread?

[geekalicious]

Short answer: no.

Long answer: I was waiting for others to post their opinons and answer the questions directed at them. You and KittyMo had been away for a bit, so I was waiting to hear their opinions, particularly on our new replacement.

So why couldn't I have been doing the same thing instead of "panicking"? Granted, I was sick, but what led you to jump to the conclusion that I was lurking?

@all: I've noticed that in general you seem to think BlueRaven is newbish and not scummy. However, based on the lack of content that he posts, how are we to judge whether or not he's scummy?

I decided to do a word count for him and found that he's posted a total of 1013 words in the thread (excluding places where he quoted, of course). For comparison purposes, Monsieur who has only been in the game for several real life days has already posted 1095 words! The lack of content from BlueRaven over the course of the thread is ridiculous and seems just plain scummy and lurker-ish to me.

BlueRaven, I'll give you that your earlier quick vote on KittyMo may have been a newbish mistake. However, coupled with your lack of real content when you have posted throughout the rest of the game....

Vote: BlueRaven

[geekalicious]

@Keyblade: What does EBWOP stand for?

EBWOP = Edit By Way of Post

(since, you know, once we post, we can't go back in and edit the content).

[geekalicious]

You mostly got chewed out for your Scum-O-Meter, 12Keyblade, because you pointed out the KittyMo could have been breadcrumbing that she's a cop.

That said, Monsieur, could you provide an explanation on why you placed each player in the category that you did?

[geekalicious]

I will abstain providing an explanation to my reads because:

1) KeyBlade and I have been the only ones to post a full reads list on the entire cast, while everyone else has not. I find this ironic because although Keyblade had taken the time to post his reads list, while others have not, they are quick to judge and criticize.

My suggestion: Everyone should post their list of reads. It doesn't matter how you present it.

2) I have contributed to the discussion far too many times, and I'd prefer other people to talk other than myself.

My suggestion: Either exert effort into this game, or it will be discouraging and the expected value of us winning will decrease.

No.

You do not post a whole list of people you find suspicious and not suspicious, not back that up, then defend your lack of proof by saying something along the lines of "Oh wellz, I've posted too much content."

[geekalicious]

My suggestion: Everyone should post their list of reads. It doesn't matter how you present it.

I'm composing a longer content post in reply to this. I've just been really busy with school since it's the end of the semester this past week. Hopefully, I'll get it posted by tomorrow.

[geekalicious]

My suggestion: Everyone should post their list of reads. It doesn't matter how you present it.

Alright, I'll respond to this call. If I use a classification system similar to yours this is where I'd be placing players:

Villa lean
KittyMo
Monsieur

Purgatory
ronnieroo

Wolf lean
illiniguy09
BlueRaven
12Keyblade

Now detailed explanations:

KittyMo

I feel like the part from the second page where KittyMo says

OMGUS is scummy.

wasn't particularly scummy even though 12Keyblade and reverendpsycho had placed votes on each other too. I get the feeling that events from Day 1 in the random voting phase have the potential to be overblown, so I don't think the 12Keyblade-reverendpsycho interaction was really significant either.

Additionally, in the earlier part of the game around post 167, 12Keyblade used the Scum-O-Meter to point out the following:

KittyMo
Post 5: Votes Krauthammer for having the funniest username.
Post 10: Admits to lurking being a pet peeve of hers. Likes to get them replaced, not lynched.
Post 16: Posts a game for geekalicious to read where she and xRECKONERx play, and xRECKONERx fails at scum.
Post 18: Playstyle is scumhunting, which she sometimes fails at.
Post 29: Votes TFGM for voting no lynch and claiming to be experienced. Inference: No Lynch is a horrible idea.
Post 61: Tells TFGM to stop screwing with the game, unless he’s frustrated scum.
Post 160: Accuses me of “tunnel vision” and mentions an “investigation.” Cop breadcrumb?
Post 162: FOSs reverendpsycho for having weak voting reasons.

Scum-O-Meter says: 3 out of 10

So I'm going to say that at least very early in the game, KittyMo wasn't appearing scummy. Moving forward, I've looked through KittyMo's posts, and I just don't see anything particularly wrong-looking. In general, she seems to asking questions and putting her opinion out there. When she voted for Zachrulez, she had reasons that seemed well-thought out and backed up by solid evidence. My only issue with her is her lack of posting as of late. So.... That's why I'm placing KittyMo in the villa lean category.

Monsieur

Overall, I've found your posts very conductive of discussion and helpful in the process of scumhunting. However, your recent refusal to support your suspicions is making me somewhat suspicious of you. If are excused from posting more content at one point because you've already posted "too much" this sets up a precedent of you continually being allowed to call that excuse, something that's not acceptable in a game that's entirely based on the way you present your arguments and suspicions.

ronnieroo

Monsieur, though you say that you and 12Keyblade are the only ones to have posted reads on each player (though, I'm going to go ahead and note that, unlike 12Keyblade's reads, yours included no post proof to back them up), ronnieroo also gave her read on the game with some questions in her post 544.

Though she doesn't post as much as some other players, when she does post it tends to be informational and insightful. However, I'll continue to monitor for the fact that her lack of posting could also constitute lurking. Additionally, I don't think you've ever voted ronnieroo... Now, this could just mean you're really weighing your options before putting your vote out there, or it could indicate scum trying to avoid the responsibility of having been on someone's wagon. I'm not sure which.

illiniguy09

This player slot is looking like it's going to have to have a third player in it now that illiniguy09 has fallen into inactivity, so getting a read is difficult. However, illiniguy09 never offered full support for his vote, only saying:

Vote: Zachrulez
- Has made weak cases and voted for several people. Seemed to be trying to frame someone.

- Refusing to role claim.

Additionally, he hammered Zachrulez when we had explicitly agreed not to do so until 12Keyblade and ronnieroo returned from their V/LA. Both of these factor make me put him in the wolf lean category.

BlueRaven

See my post 569. In response to your comment,

BlueRaven is not like us, her contributions are more of analyzing the reactions that surround her. She isn't the type to post long analysis posts such as myself.

I can understand not making long posts. However, BlueRaven only really comments when pressed to, rarely contributing to the conversation without prompting. This seems scummy to me, like BlueRaven isn't even looking for scum.

12Keyblade

Early in the game, we had this interaction:

Um, 12Keyblade, where's the analysis of yourself?

Listen, if I analyze myself, I'll come up town, even if I am scum. (cause I'm biased). Feel free to do it.

At the time, this seemed a rather reasonable thing to say that you couldn't really evaluate yourself. However, post-Zachrulez lynch in your post 535 that was filled with evaluations of others you said

So here's what I think:
geek, BlueRaven, Zach and I looked scummy to start.

So wait, did you suddenly gain the ability to perceive yourself as scummy, hm?

Additionally, going back to the Scum-O-Meter you putting

Post 160: Accuses me of “tunnel vision” and mentions an “investigation.” Cop breadcrumb?

is still looking like a scummy role-fish. Finally, you very recently accused me of lurking, saying

2. It's possible his lurking can be attributed to panicking.

However, you also weren't posting during the exact same period of time! When I pressed you about it, you said

So why couldn't I have been doing the same thing instead of "panicking"? Granted, I was sick, but what led you to jump to the conclusion that I was lurking?

I wasn't aware that you were sick, and as such, I apologize.

Your part of the post was not a response to my question; it was an apology, totally different. You were caught in the place of accusing me of lurking while not posting yourself, so you dodged the question.

While these factors aren't enough to warrant a vote, 12Keyblade, they do put you in a category leaning towards wolf for me.

[geekalicious]

Oh, and

mod, illiniguy09 hasn't posted anything since July 19....

See this post.

[geekalicious]

villa lean
keyblade
blueraven

purgatory
illiniguy

wolf lean
kittymo
geekalicious
ronnieroo

Oh no Monsieur, that got me in trouble earlier. That being said, I concur with most of what's listed there.

Villa lean
KittyMo
Monsieur

Purgatory
ronnieroo

Wolf lean
illiniguy09
BlueRaven
12Keyblade

I'm not quoting your post, because it's way too long. But it should be understood that I've read it.

I'm inclined to agree with you on just about everything. I'm going to nitpick the analysis of me on a couple of things.

12Keyblade, Monsieur's post of suspicions is somewhat of an inverse of mine that you agreed with at the beginning of the page. Yet, somehow, you now are inclined to agree with me "on just about everything" near the end of the same page? What, are you just sponging up opinions?

[geekalicious]

I just wanted to let you all know that I won't be available on the thread tomorrow (Saturday). And sorry about the avatar. I just couldn't resist the temptation to change it after I mocked this up for another forum I'm posting on.

[geekalicious]

Just letting you know that I'm checking in on the thread. Since I just did a full analysis of what I see in the game on the last page, I really can't find anything to comment on at the moment besides the fact that I would also like to see a bit of explanation behind this round of the Scum-O-Meter, 12Keyblade. It doesn't have to be as detailed as last time.

Oh, and welcome to the game, Riddle. I'm looking forward to reading your commentary.

[geekalicious]

So unless anyone (besides the accused) is against it, I will vote for geek after illin's replacement shows up and offers his opinion, unless that manages to sway me in the extreme.

And for those who are counting, Deadline is August 9. People, that's less than a week.

Well, our replacement has finally spoken, 12Keyblade. Where does your vote lie while you're reminding us that we need to vote?

[geekalicious]

ronnieroo, you haven't posted in a while. What's your opinion on our Day 2 lynch with the deadline looming so close?

I personally think that this is a harder day to vote on than Day 1... We've had a replacement for reverendpsycho and illiniguy09, and with Monsieur likely having abandonded the game, we're probably going to need a replacement on him soon.

and i just realised that we dont have that much time till the deadline so we need to act fast...

Well, make comments on who you're really finding to be scummy, BlueRaven.

[geekalicious]

Hello, Raskol, welcome to the game. When you get a chance to (I understand that this thread is a lot to read), could you give us your read on who you find most scummy at the moment?

[geekalicious]

Ummm...holy crap. Can I be perfectly honest for a minute? I'm considering voting for Raskol just for that. I don't see ronnie's playstyle as scummy in the least...OK, slightly. Very, very little. Like, almost not at all. Point is, I never considered voting for such a pro-town player. I really want to see the reasons behind this, or my vote may go from geek to Raskol.

Then why's she a 6 on your scum-o-meter?

I was about to ask the exact same thing, 12Keyblade. How does ronnieroo go from being a 6 on your Scum-O-Meter to being someone that you could "never consider voting" for?

Additionally, I can see Raskol's point about ronnieroo not voting while putting her suspicions out there. I can understand voting not being a heavy element of your playstyle, ronnieroo, but casting your suspicions out there without ever voting obviates you from ever taking responsibility for your voting patterns. You don't have to pull a Zachrulez and whiplash your vote from player to player. There's a middle ground.

[geekalicious]

I don't post as much as some people do. That is my play style.

I'll note that your playstyle allows you to start posting more actively when accusations start to fall on you. You've had three posts within the past couple of pages which I think might be the most active I've seen you.

[geekalicious]

@Geek: Well, I have something to say that isn't spam or repetitive.

What is it with you and acting like posting more than a lurkerish level of posts is spamming/repetitive? Even if we all posts cases against the same person, we're very liable to come up with different elements than others and a different perspective on the person. This process facilitates discussion over the differences, etc, etc until we can decide on a lynch.

Again, I'm going to note that your "playstyle" is suddenly allowing you to post more than you have the whole game when fire comes up under you.

[geekalicious]

Again, I'm going to note that your "playstyle" is suddenly allowing you to post more than you have the whole game when fire comes up under you.

You yell at her when she posts, and you yell at her when she doesn't. @-@ That seems just a tad unfair, don't ya think?

Hm.... You have a point. My point isn't really to yell at ronnieroo, but also to put the thought out there for others to analyze. Additionally, she HAS defined her playstyle as being a lack of posting. So for her to break from the habit only in the case defending herself appears scummy.

I said she needed moved.

Geek, that's your answer too. I was having a delusional day. However, I am not going to vote for Raskol yet. Why? He finally got ronnie to post more that two lines!

I really need to think about my vote, but I will place one later 2day or early 2morrow.

Delusional day? What is that even supposed to mean? Additionally, if you think she needed to be moved, why did you even post her as a 6 on your Scum-O-Meter to begin with?! If ronnieroo were to flip scum, that vaguely worded post on your Scum-O-Meter basically gives you the ability to say "well, she was a 6 on my Scum-O-Meter" but it also lets you say "well, I said she needed to be moved." Win-win, eh, 12Keyblade?

As far as today's lynch is concerned, I'll probably keep my vote situated on BlueRaven.... See the case I already outlined for reasons. ronnieroo, however, commits the same behavior as BlueRaven such as the general lack of posting. However, ronnieroo doesn't have the ability to play the newbie card with regard to her lurking, and the complete lack of voting is suspect. Additionally, her reactions to Raskol's questioning have been interesting.

2---Not voting as much as some people do is fine. Not voting at all isn't. She's trying to imply that her only options are to either 'vote for everyone' and 'look like Zach' or vote for no one. She's twisting things again, pretending like her only option if we don't like her extreme, is for her to go to the opposite extreme. This is a scummy way to defend yourself.

Well, based on your accusation, you wanted me to vote for everyone I was suspicous of.

Raskol never said that he wanted ronnieroo to vote for everyone that she's suspicious of. He said

-almost all of her posts contain something like the words "this makes me very suspicious of you" and yet she never votes. This is scum behavior. Moreover, when asked later why she didn't vote, she said she had never found anyone suspicious enough! If very suspicious doesn't cut it, ronnie, just what does it take to get you to vote?

with the emphasis on "very specific." ronnieroo was thus twisting his words.

-almost all of her posts contain something like the words "this makes me very suspicious of you" and yet she never votes. This is scum behavior. Moreover, when asked later why she didn't vote, she said she had never found anyone suspicious enough! If very suspicious doesn't cut it, ronnie, just what does it take to get you to vote?

I become suspicous of the post, and thus question the player behind it. I don't feel that ONE post nessassarly warrants a vote.

Again, ronnieroo is twisting Raskol's words and acting as if he just wants her to throw her vote around based upon one post by a player. That's clearly not what he said.

Based on the above, I wouldn't be uncomfortable with a ronnieroo lynch today.

I want to see more from Riddle especially since his player slot has been suspect a decent chunk of the game, but I don't really see enough scummy behavior to lynch him yet.

[geekalicious]

Haha. You're so funny. I don't play those games. Please don't pretend like I do.

Point relying on knowledge of the player = weak.

Delusional Day (n) -- a day upon which one is too lazy to do work. The mind is understimulated and thus, one tends to say/type/write/think things that make no sense or are delusional.

Calling on the excuse of laziness = weak.

[geekalicious]

Strawmanning=weak. I really don't want a flame war here.

I am not strawmanning, 12Keyblade. Saying that you were having a "delusional day" on which you were too lazy to do work was a flat-out weak defense to my point against you.

[geekalicious]

If ronnieroo were to flip scum, that vaguely worded post on your Scum-O-Meter basically gives you the ability to say "well, she was a 6 on my Scum-O-Meter" but it also lets you say "well, I said she needed to be moved." Win-win, eh, 12Keyblade?

Craplogic. Since for this post, you seem to be assuming that Keyblade is scum, if ronnie flips scum, HE WOULD KNOW BECAUSE HE WOULD BE HER PARTNER. You're saying he would (hypothetically) be trying to buss her by putting her high on the scum-o-meter, even though he didn't even put any reasons for her being scummy? I'm pretty sure Keyblade is smart enough as scum to know that if you're going to buss your partner, at least do a good job at it, because if you do a crappy job bussing, you look even scummier. If Keyblade was trying to buss ronnie, he could make an attack on her exactly like Raskol did. What motivation would he have to crappily buss her? None. So, your attack makes no sense. It even makes Keyblade look more like a townie.

I never said that 12Keyblade and ronnieroo were scum buddies/ that he was trying to bus her (he's obviously not trying to bus her since he's been hedging on voting for me a long time) so you're putting words in my mouth there. However, I do find the ambiguity in his part about ronnieroo in the Scum-O-Meter scummy. He could have replied to the allegation himself like you did for him instead of saying

Haha. You're so funny. I don't play those games. Please don't pretend like I do.

which isn't even an actual argument.

I completely disagree. He and his predecessors may have a low post count, but I would say that a huge portion of these posts are scummy. Also, why do you have different standards for Keyblade and Riddle? You called Keyblade scummy for invoking the "I'm lazy excuse", and yet Riddle, who said the same thing, isn't? Double standards are also scummy.

Riddle also said that he was busy in the same post. I definitely agree that he needs to post more and he'll warrant more suspicion if this habit of his continues, but real life could be intervening for him right now.

Your opportunistic jump on Ronnie is also noted.

I'm not opportunistically jumping on ronnieroo. As you'll note, I had already placed her in my Purgatory category when I rated her. Seeing the way she's reacting to Raskol's questioning is only tipping her into the Wolf Lean category for me.

[geekalicious]

I never said that 12Keyblade and ronnieroo were scum buddies/ that he was trying to bus her (he's obviously not trying to bus her since he's been hedging on voting for me a long time) so you're putting words in my mouth there.

You're telling me that Keyblade as a townie (or any townie, for that matter) would try to pretend they found someone scummy, or pretend they didn't find someone scummy?

I don't know whether he was town having a "delusional day" where he just put something contradictory out there or whether he was scum having a "delusional day" where he just put something contradictory out there (he obviously changed his mind and put ronnieroo at a 3 now). That's why I put the allegation up so that he could explain to me what in the world was going through his head at that moment. It wasn't good play regardless of his alignment. His lack of a reasoned response pushes him further into scum territory for me.

Riddle also said that he was busy in the same post. I definitely agree that he needs to post more and he'll warrant more suspicion if this habit of his continues, but real life could be intervening for him right now.

Would you mind explaining to me what you find pro-town about him? All I've seen him do is sit back and encourage other people to post. Illiniguy was also very very scummy.

Since he replaced into that player slot, I wanted to give him a chance before the end of the day to prove himself as non-scum. I personally wouldn't want to be slammed as scum for a previous player's suck play. As I said, if he continues this habit of non-posting, then my suspicion level is definitely going to rise.

[geekalicious]

To put my thoughts out there (and I know this is going to sound.... odd) but I actually think that I'll make a good lynch candidate for today. The thought has been pressing at the back of my mind for a while, and here's why:

On several things such as the following that Riddle listed (I cleaned up the botched urls in it for the sake of clarity):

2nd on TFGM bw.
2nd on the Blue Raven Bandwagon
tries to justify his misquoting of 12Keyblade
Tries to carry the Blue Raven bandwagong by suggesting Blue saw a poll about scum mistakes
Another mis-quote and joins the Zach bw
possible KittyMo biddying
accuses ronnieroo of defending herself

I cannot defend myself on. Being second on both of the above wagons was something that I in retrospect did too hastily. As I noted later in the thread when being questioned by Monsieur, I should have waited until I gathered more evidence rather than pressure voting the offenders for one scum tell.

On the point with 12Keyblade misquoting, I'm not really seeing how I did that. On the Zachrulez misquoting, yep, I'll admit that I did misquote though it was accidental. I had plenty other quibbles with Zachrulez that I wouldn't have needed to misquote him to build a case. However, looking at the incident from a third person perspective, I can definitely see the scumminess in the action.

KittyMo buddying? Still not seeing that one. I only stated that I saw her case as more coherent.

As far as accusing ronnieroo of defending herself goes, I can see how I may have been too harsh on her from a third person perspective. However, for a person to only post to defend themselves when they've spent the entire game just casting out suspicions and not actively following up those suspicions with active scum hunting looks wrong to me. Obviously, she's capable of posting more than she does.

So, all in all, I think I'm a good lynch candidate for today. If I were through some miracle to survive into Day 3, I know that I would be too easy of a target then for all the stupidly newbish things I did on Day 1 that I can't defend myself on. At least with me out of the way today, that'll clear the air a bit and prevent a bad Day 3 mislynch from occuring.

[geekalicious]

Geekalicious

Puts suspicion on like 4 different people in 2 relatively short posts
His only post in like 2 weeks

BTW, Riddle, I'm pretty sure that you meant reverendpsycho there, not geekalicious.

[geekalicious]

Geek I personally think that if you're town you're never a good lynch target if you're town, even if you're the most unhelpful townie on the planet I would rather lynch mafia (If you are town, not saying he is town). The way I look at that you're either a townie thinking that with you gone finding the mafia will be easier (Which if you are town it may or may not be. It's still a townie lost. (I say a townie lost because I'm thinking the cop or doctor would not say they were a good target for lynching. Right now I'm thinking Geek is either a townie or mafia)), or a mafia player trying to look like a townie hoping to throw off votes. Right now I'm leaning towards the last option.

Zachrulez, xRECKONERx, 12Keyblade, Riddle, BlueRaven, you, Monsieur/reverendpsycho players and now KittyMo have all found me suspicious. Honestly, looking at it from an objective perspective, I don't see how I'd make a bad lynch target if you don't know my alignment.

[geekalicious]

Role claim? Townie. Though, like BlueRaven said, I don't see why anyone would claim scum.

[geekalicious]

any power role or just vanillia?

Just vanilla.

and geek you should always defend till the end, i was reminded of this when i was on death row...

I agree that I should continue defending myself. However, it's pretty much not doing me any good at this point because of the indefensible things I did on Day 1 that keep coming up again and again. I'm very frustrated at this point in the game... I hate having the sensation that I'm backed into a wall.

[geekalicious]

Well, if you're a townie, even if you feel frustrated and backed into a wall, you must do what you can to help the town. Zach's refusal to defend himself at the end just ended up hurting the town, but the cases he made on people still live on for us to look at and use. So, if we decide to lynch you over Riddle, and you're a townie, please give us all the information you can.

Alright, I can do that.

12Keyblade

He's been acting very odd lately.

ronnieroo (6) Honestly seems town, but at the same time, Zach's case rings some bells...really, I think this needs moved.

This part of his Scum-O-Meter is contradictory. Very soon afterwards he says

Ummm...holy crap. Can I be perfectly honest for a minute? I'm considering voting for Raskol just for that. I don't see ronnie's playstyle as scummy in the least...OK, slightly. Very, very little. Like, almost not at all. Point is, I never considered voting for such a pro-town player. I really want to see the reasons behind this, or my vote may go from geek to Raskol.

Wait, she goes from a 6 to almost completely non-scummy that quickly? When I press him about the issue, he doesn't even defend himself. He just says

Haha. You're so funny. I don't play those games. Please don't pretend like I do.

As I said before, not an argument and thus pushes him into a higher level of scummy for me. Additionally, he mentions having a "delusional day". Uh huh. Again, not an argument, just a very odd excuse.

Strawmanning=weak. I really don't want a flame war here.

Wait, so are you threatening to start a flame war with me on a mafia forum? Again, scummy.

BlueRaven

I'm pleased with the fact that BlueRaven's most recent posts have been longer and better thought out than his initial batch of posts. My main issues with him have mostly been the lack of posting combined with the lack of content when he does post. Hm....

Unvote

KittyMo

I'm not opportunistically jumping on ronnieroo. As you'll note, I had already placed her in my Purgatory category when I rated her. Seeing the way she's reacting to Raskol's questioning is only tipping her into the Wolf Lean category for me.

Hmmm. I must have you confused with someone else then. Sorry about that.

You shouldn't have thrown out there that I was leaping on ronnieroo without reason if you weren't certain. However, I'm still overall really seeing you as a townie.

Riddle

Hm.... I'm really thinking about the possibility of a Riddle lynch. His predecessor illiniguy09 was rather scummy. I mentioned earlier that I wanted to give him a chance to defend himself against his predecessor's bad reputation, though. Thus far... well, I don't really think he's doing well. Almost all of the points against me that he listed have been a re-hash of points other players made. I don't really any reasoning behind it besides the game links that he posted which I'm guessing he figures just speak for themselves.

Raskol

Came in and waged a case against ronnieroo. Nothing scummy about the case that I can see.... However, what came after was:

Riddle, on the other hand, still isn't here, and so....

Unvote

Vote: Riddle

I my view, that's our best target for today. I could go into all the reasons why, but most of what needed to be said about Krauthammer and Illini already has been, and Riddle has been evasive and hasn't contributed anything. So let's lynch him.

The reasoning behind the case wasn't as strong as his other case. Earlier, Raskol had said

Riddle----I found both of your predecessors scummy and I think you'd be best served making sure you make up for their mistakes. I wouldn't mind lynching you either at this point, at all. Get into the conversation.

However, Raskol didn't wait for Riddle to get back into the conversation before he voted for him. Somewhat scummy since I believe he should have waited for Riddle to make at least one post before voting for him.

ronnieroo

I feel like my current points against ronnieroo are basically summed up in my post 663.

Additionally, I'm sorry if I'm doing bad town play right now.... With the majority of players on my case for the whole game, I'm just starting to feel like I'm cracking.

[geekalicious]

You know what? Never mind. I've reread, and I'd rather have a more active poster D3. I don't care if this makes me look scummy, it needs to be done.

Unvote

Vote: Riddle

Harp on me all you want D3. Just remember I won't be here until the 16th. Good luck to any docs/cops out there; I'm rooting for us!

We... explicitly.... agreed.... not.... to.... hammer........

[geekalicious]

well it dosnt make a difference, he was going to get lynched anyway. so i dont see all the comotion.

It does matter when we set the precedent that no one was to hammer him, a policy set out in bold:

vote: Riddle

NO ONE VOTE FOR ANYONE unless you have a very very very good reason for doing so

[geekalicious]

When 12Keyblade returns from vacation, I want a response from him about what I posted about him in my post 712 and about his hammering of Riddle at the end of the day. Within the same 24 hour period, he went from

So, that's L-1. Just so we're all aware.

Re Riddle's analysis: On the first readthrough, it looked really good. Kinda like what I'd expect from Monsieur, TBH. However, looking back, it could have had more content. I'm really having an issue getting a good read on him because of all the replacements, but the fact that the player slot has been scummy sound kinda weak. He seems to be the majority opinion, but I'm happy with my vote where it is.

Also, I see fit to remind everyone that after this lynch, when day breaks I won't be here. So don't ask me questions yet. And no speedlynching! (unless hypothetical cop has a guilty).

where is he is having a hard time reading the slot and thinks the fact that the player slot has been scummy is weak, and thus remains content with his vote on me to, at the end of the day, deeming Riddle sufficiently scummy to be hammered.

You know what? Never mind. I've reread, and I'd rather have a more active poster D3. I don't care if this makes me look scummy, it needs to be done.

Unvote

Vote: Riddle

Harp on me all you want D3. Just remember I won't be here until the 16th. Good luck to any docs/cops out there; I'm rooting for us!

Ah, so wait. You pinged me to be scummy but would "rather have a more active poster on D3", so you hammered Riddle? Additionally, why did hammering need to be done? Riddle would have been lynched at the deadline point anyway.

[geekalicious]

I already claimed as a vanilla townie yesterday, so I won't be needing to claim again, right?

Currently, after looking through the game again today, I find 12Keyblade most suspicious based on what I've posted in my post 712. Additionally, I've added bold to the points of key interest in the post below:

KittyMo
Post 5: Votes Krauthammer for having the funniest username.
Post 10: Admits to lurking being a pet peeve of hers. Likes to get them replaced, not lynched.
Post 16: Posts a game for geekalicious to read where she and xRECKONERx play, and xRECKONERx fails at scum.
Post 18: Playstyle is scumhunting, which she sometimes fails at.
Post 29: Votes TFGM for voting no lynch and claiming to be experienced. Inference: No Lynch is a horrible idea.
Post 61: Tells TFGM to stop screwing with the game, unless he’s frustrated scum.
Post 160: Accuses me of “tunnel vision” and mentions an “investigation.”

Cop

breadcrumb?
Post 162: FOSs reverendpsycho for having weak voting reasons.

Scum-O-Meter says: 3 out of 10

Also, I see fit to remind everyone that after this lynch, when day breaks I won't be here. So don't ask me questions yet. And no speedlynching! (unless hypothetical

cop

has a guilty).

You know what? Never mind. I've reread, and I'd rather have a more active poster D3. I don't care if this makes me look scummy, it needs to be done.

Unvote

Vote: Riddle

Harp on me all you want D3. Just remember I won't be here until the 16th. Good luck to any

docs/cops

out there; I'm rooting for us!

Also, if there is a

cop

, they should claim now with any/all results. If there is not, then fine. See you all on Sunday; no speedlynching!

Throughout the entire game, 12Keyblade has shown an unhealthy interest in rolefishing for the cop role.

[geekalicious]

Who do you want to claim first, KittyMo?

well i would of said geek but he's already claimed. So i would of thought ronnieroo would be a good start.

Can you give some reasons why you think ronnieroo is a good place to start since I've already claimed?

[geekalicious]

Just letting you all know that I'm hear reading. However, it's hard to find content to post about with most of the players absent....

[geekalicious]

Just letting you all know that I'm hear reading. However, it's hard to find content to post about with most of the players absent....

And why is that?

Yesterday, before the lynch, I posted full out analysises of each player in the game. Since the lynch, I've posed my questions to 12Keyblade, and now we're doing a mass claim. I was just finding it hard to comment at the moment.

you didnt say it plane and simple but you sogested it in saying 'Blue is more likely to be scum.' who agree's with me here?

Well, looking at KittyMo's quotes:

You've raised some good points, Geek, but I wonder if we should have someone else go first just because we don't want to waste 3 days waiting around for him to get back. I think between Blue and ronnie, Blue is more likely to be scum, so I'd vote for him going first. If Keyblade was here, though, I'd probably have him go first.

I find you, Geek, and Keyblade pretty equally scummy, for reasons I explained yesterday. I need to reread, though, and get my reads fixed...my brain isn't working very well at the moment. :s

KittyMo does go from saying she would want 12Keyblade to claim first, implying that she finds him more scummy than BlueRaven, to saying that she finds me, 12Keyblade, and BlueRaven all equal. Not the contradiction you noted, BlueRaven, but it is a bit contradictory.

[geekalicious]

I think between Blue and ronnie, Blue is more likely to be scum

THAT IS NOT A CONTRADICTION WITH ANYTHING I SAID.

I don't think anyone said you found ronnieroo and BlueRaven equal... Pulling up your quotes again:

You've raised some good points, Geek, but I wonder if we should have someone else go first just because we don't want to waste 3 days waiting around for him to get back. I think between Blue and ronnie, Blue is more likely to be scum, so I'd vote for him going first. If Keyblade was here, though, I'd probably have him go first.

I find you, Geek, and Keyblade pretty equally scummy, for reasons I explained yesterday. I need to reread, though, and get my reads fixed...my brain isn't working very well at the moment. :s

My issue is that you said you found 12Keyblade scummier than BlueRaven in your first quote and then said that me, 12Keyblade, and BlueRaven were equal. Do you not find that a bit contradictory?

Oh, and 12Keyblade, I guess you should go ahead and claim. ronnieroo was supposed to do it next, but since she'll be preoccupied until the 18th/ 19th, might as well keep the claim ball rolling.

[geekalicious]

Yeah, the thread isn't making much progress right now. 12Keyblade (or even KittyMo since we're mass claiming), could you go ahead and claim to help keep the thread going?

[geekalicious]

Ummmm, it'd be nice if people would post more when they feel there need to be more posts instead of just complaining about how nobody else is posting. >_>

Yeah, sorry about that. I've been really busy in RL too...

My thought right now is that 12Keyblade is scum based on a number of issues with him in posts that I've talked about already (I'll pull them up if anyone says the word) that involve things such as his poor defenses for his actions. Additionally, he's continuing to defend with statements like

Tee hee, you're so funny. I don't rolefish. It's how I play.

Alright, again, you're just throwing out a commment that 1) laughs at my suspicions which I don't appreciate and 2) acts like I shouldn't be bothered by your overactive interest in roles because that's just how you play.

Additionally, looking through KittyMo's analysis, you find that 12Keyblade was on both wagons, being the first on Day 1 and the hammer when we had agreed not to hammer on Day 2.

Whoops, sorry for neglecting the thread. As to my scummy hammer, I jumped the gun by two hours. Two. Hours. It was clear that we weren't going to get any input before deadline or before I left, so I dropped the hammer. If having the guts to do so was an issue, then fine. Lynch me for doing what was going to happen anyway.

How was it an issue of having the "guts" to hammer? We agreed not to hammer, and you broke the agreement.

Well, that was faster than I thought it'd be...this worries me guys. I left for 5 days and had 1 page of posts to read. No discussion=scum win. Geek, I've defendend against your accusations time and time again. Either vote for me (bad, as scum will quickhammer) or quit tunnelling.

We're in lylo, so that's the reason I'm not voting for you. If you actually are town, then I don't want to give an easy scum hammer to the scum team.

So general ideas of 12Keyblade? Or who do you find more suspicious?

[geekalicious]

Ok, I'm back. Didn't get a chance to post last night.

Since I'm supposed to roleclaim next here it goes,
I want to say congratz to the mafia roleblocker, I would like to know why you chose to roleblock me though.

I'm cop. I investigated KittyMo night one and was roleblocked, and 12KeyBlade night two, was roleblocked.

I don't believe this claim. Seriously, blocked two nights in a row when I don't see anything for the scum to use to seriously implicate that you're a cop throughout the game and thus lead them to roleblock you? That sounds too convenient.

So...should we let ronnie lead us, as it appears geek and I are merely going to continue to go back and forth? Or would you rather I ressurect my PBPA from earlier?

Why are we letting ronnieroo lead us? It's not even like she has any confirmed results to use and convince us of her claim.

Anyway, I'm curious on everyone's thoughts on my case. -yawn- I might go take a nap now. That took a while...

Well, as I stated before, I think 12Keyblade is very scummy. I haven't had time to fully go through your case yet, but it looks sound from what I've read. As for a scum partner, I'd lean towards ronnieroo right now since 12Keyblade is willing to let her lead the discussion without really questioning the validity of her claim.

[geekalicious]

(bold added)

Ok, Geek, if I was mafia and was planning to roleclaim cop, in a LyLo situation, here is exactly what I would've done:

Night one I investigated Roskol (or some other dead townie), night two I investigated BlueRaven (or some other townie that would've been an easy lynch (I'm NOT saying he is pro-town)), and (s)he came up scum. Townies follow, mafia win. If I was mafia, why on earth would I've risked claiming a cop with no results? For one thing, I would risk there actually being a cop, secondly it would've been an easy mafia win to just say one of the easy town targets, thirdly having no results makes me less belivable.

That first statement made your explanation WIFOM, so I'm not believing it.

@KittyMo, No not a compliment. Overplaying innocence can be just as bad as playing very scummy.

What, so do you prefer an occasional scumtell from a player in order for you to not be suspicious of them?

Thoughts on Geekalicious:
A. Has been a suspect basically the whole game. He slightly confuses me. I honestly never really know who he suspects.

Not sure what you mean by that.... I think I've been clear on who I suspect.

kitty & key
kitty & geek
key & geek (both look scummy and thus could create a pair)

Why these particular combos? And I don't recall you finding KittyMo suspicious before.

And bravo. Really. Well played by all. Do you really think I'm dumb enough to make that post without an ulterior motive? No. No I'm not.

If your play hadn't been so scummy lately, then I would have an easier time seeing your post as testing for reactions. However, judging by your poor defenses lately, consistent rolefishing, etc., I wouldn't be shocked if you made that post, realized the scumminess of it, then pinged it as a post to test reactions.

Well, you're not alone, since Ronnie doesn't seem to know either, and the other 2 didn't comment...

*is slightly confused* Comment on what...?

[geekalicious]

Ok, Geek, if I was mafia and was planning to roleclaim cop, in a LyLo situation, here is exactly what I would've done:

Night one I investigated Roskol (or some other dead townie), night two I investigated BlueRaven (or some other townie that would've been an easy lynch (I'm NOT saying he is pro-town)), and (s)he came up scum. Townies follow, mafia win. If I was mafia, why on earth would I've risked claiming a cop with no results? For one thing, I would risk there actually being a cop, secondly it would've been an easy mafia win to just say one of the easy town targets, thirdly having no results makes me less belivable.

I just noted something in a portion of your post here. You say that you would have run the risk of someone else saying that they're a cop.

This isn't true as everyone else claimed before you did.

Before you put your claim out there, everyone else had claimed vanilla town and thus, even if someone else was a cop, they wouldn't be able to come out and claim it later without being called a liar.

[geekalicious]

Please don't ask me to explain why, as I have already done so. This is what I was talking to Keyblade about up above. This also means that Geek's last post was incorrect, because waiting for everyone else to claim doesn't matter. This is assuming, of course, that one or more of Ronnie, 12Keyblade, and Geekalicious (since at least one of them, from my perspective, is scum) lied about not knowing the setup. I guess the scum could've not put 2 and 2 together and not realized the thing about the setup, but...I find that unlikely. So yup.

Looking at how you explain the scum knowing the setup, there could still be the possibility of scum waiting until everyone claimed. If they know that there is a cop actually in the game since they have a roleblocker, then they would withold from claiming cop until the end, seeing if the actual cop would come out and claim. If the actual cop decided to withold, then claiming as cop would be safe.

[geekalicious]

You are scummy because I find your case on me to be full of holes.

I found her case to be rather solid, and you probably did too since you didn't comment on a lot of the second half of it. And at least KittyMo's not explaining her actions by saying that she's having "delusional days" or by making explanations for posts that amount to "tee hee, don't think I'm scum, I just play like that!"

Also, why is everyone suddenly finding KittyMo suspicious? BlueRaven places her in several scum pairings, 12Keyblade finds KittyMo's logic faulty and scummy, and ronnieroo says that she deserved to be investigated because she's "overplaying innocence".

[geekalicious]

To clear this up, I do NOT currently find KittyMo most suspicous, at this moment she's in my bottom two.

Secondly, I thought she was overplaying innocence on day one. I don't think she is anymore, and I never said I still did. She was worth investigating on day one.

@KeyBlade, ok I've noticed I've gone from obviously town to 99% sure mafia. I find it odd that you've thought I was town the whole game, and now after role claiming a town role you think I'm mafia. What has caused you to change your mind? The unlikly hood of it happening changed your mind?

I'm still kind of confused on what constitutes "overplaying innocence".... Can you give an example or two, ronnieroo?

The second part of your post is a good thought. I notice that he did say in reference to you

By the slight, itty bitty chance you're town, I don't want a scum quickhammer.

which implies that he thinks you're complete scum. And in reference to KittyMo he said

You are scummy because I find your case on me to be full of holes.

which just strikes me wrong because it reaks of "OMGUS suspicion" just because she's launched a case against him. If we pull up the last version of the Scum-O-Meter from page 27, here's what we have:

New New Scum-O-Meter

Town

KittyMo (2)
ronnieroo (3)
Riddle (3.5)
BlueRaven (4)
Raskol (5)
geekalicious (7)

Scum

Obviously, he's found me lynchworthy for some time, so I'm really not seeing how just ronnieroo's claim would be enough to push her to my level of scumminess in 12Keyblade's mind.

Forgot to add on:
If anyone thinks I am posting too much, kindly tell me to shut up, and I'll do it. I personally want to hear more from...well, all of you, but particularly BlueRaven.

A player helping drive discussion is fine with me. The start of a new semester has been slicing into my mafia game time....

[geekalicious]

Hm, rather interesting chart, KittyMo. How did you go through the posts to compose the chart? Seems like a lot of work unless you coded up a program to automate the process. And how did you get it to do the chart formatting in the BBcode?

Now, going through and multiplying out both columns that you gave produced a third column that seems to be a nice meaure of overall activity level:

Posts*100's of Chars / Day^2
12Keyblade 11.04
BlueRaven 2.34
Geekalicious 14.99
KittyMo 22.36
Ronnieroo 1.89

This basically enables us to see that the most content on average has been posted by KittyMo, followed by me, then 12Keyblade, then a huge drop in activity down to BlueRaven, and finally hitting ronnieroo. Hm.....

As far as overall game thoughts are concerned, I'm bothered by the fact that 12Keyblade still hasn't posted a revised Scum-O-Meter. As the deadline approaches, I'm seeing him as our best Day 3 lynch (as I've shown through a number of posts I've made on him that I'll pull up if asked). While ronnieroo's claim still bothers me, 12Keyblade's behavior overall is scummier.

[geekalicious]

Ya know, maybe everyone should give an updated scum-o-meter, unless they can link to a post where they gave one and their reads are unchanged. I definitely one updated ones from 12Keyblade and BlueRaven, because their reads on people seem to have changed a lot recently. I'm going to work on making another one, but I have to go do stuff in other games first.

Alright, I can do that:

Paradisio
KittyMo - Has been rather pro-town the whole game

Purgatorio
BlueRaven - Lots of lurking and constantly pulling the n00b card. Not sure at this point whether he's just a newbie or scum.

Inferno
12Keyblade - I've said why I'm suspicious of him many times
ronnieroo - Overall lurkerish behavior coupled with a hard to swallow claim just isn't striking me right

im sorry and i realy am, one of my family members has had an accident and my parants and i are now going up to london to see them. I'll be away for the next few days unfortunitally. If you realy want to lynch me do so and lose.

Hope things go well for your family member BlueRaven.

The fact 12Keyblade hasn't posted is just starting to get ridiculous. I'm ready to vote for him at this point with the deadline so close. I'm kind of confused when the appropriate time to vote during LyLo is, though...

[geekalicious]

Pretty much, you want to vote when you can't be convinced otherwise that someone isn't scum, because if you're wrong, then the real scum can jump in and win. I'm always a total scaredy-cat about voting in LyLo. =O

*thinks* This late in the Day with the deadline pressing close, I really don't think I can be convinced that 12Keyblade isn't scum. He's had way too many scum tells for me at this point.

*prays this doesn't lead to scum hammer*

Vote: 12Keyblade

[geekalicious]

12Keyblade, you've been tunneling in on me for a decent chunk of the game and now suddenly you're going after ronnieroo with a vote (when we're in lylo, I might add) only for the reason that she had a claim that doesn't sit quite right? That just makes me feel more comfortable with keeping my vote where it is.

[geekalicious]

Wow, it's the eve of the deadline, and there's no activity? I've already placed my vote out there. ronnieroo, KittyMo, and BlueRaven what are you feeling about today's lynch?

[geekalicious]

Dang timezone differences. Gaaaah.

Okay, I'll shut up now. I just feel really stupid. Good game, town. I bet we would have won if I hadn't screwed up.

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

- KittyMo

Shh, don't panic yet KittyMo. Let's see what VRK has to say about the matter first. He knows we're in different time zones, maybe he'll be lenient. I hope so....

[geekalicious]

*sigh* Well, I will congratulate you KittyMo for being so great at being scum. I honestly don't recall have anything to suspect you for.

One of the main things I would change about my play in the game would be how I handled when Riddle was getting lynched. I just had a very nasty feeling about that lynch, but I was afraid that if he flipped scum after I had defended him heavily then it would be considered a scum tell and lead to me being lynched on Day 3. Very, very bad decision in retrospect and I should have gone with my gut feeling on the situation.

Also, I'm just all round upset with the heavy lurking by town on Day 3, though (myself included). If the town had more active players, then I think we could have at least brought down 12Keyblade.

Anyway, thank you guys for an all round interesting game. I've honestly never done a mafia game before and I think this was a pretty good introduction.

And Zachrulez, no hard feelings for you wanting to lynch me (though that tantrum before the lynch was.... alright, it was kind of funny ). I was acting like a newbie scum ball on Day 1, so I really don't blame you.

[geekalicious]

Little bit.

Lol.

I'm still amazed at how easily ronnieroo zoned in on the scum with her investigations. Definitely going to have to pay more attention to the "too sparkly to be mafia" thing next time.

[geekalicious]

Also: I don't see how after I got NK'd following my suspicions on Kraut and Keyblade, there wasn't an immediate witch hunt on those two.

I figured you were knocked off because you're an IC, and your death thus served to spread confusion.

[geekalicious]

woohoo, I may end up being Geek's IC in his next game. hopefully we'll be on the same side this time.

Haha, yeah, I noticed that it could be a possibility. I hope you are even though you pwned me.