mini 814: OVER!

[Locke Lamora]

ODDin: if you've managed to catch up, who is your top suspect? Do you still find Fluffy scummy for voting for Tarballs after I did? What do you make of the Spinach votes?

[ODDin]

Okay, caught up.

My top suspect right now are Spinach, with Fluffy in second place.

Reasons:

Spinach:
1) He didn't vote for Starbuck.
2) This has been brought up by Locke and Fluffy, and they voted Tarballs. He then follows to gently push against Tarballs himself, in a somewhat wishy-washy manner. He's raising a suspicion, and then saying it's probably nothing. It's a classical way to attempt a win-win. When Tarballs questions him, he just says it's nothing, thus not warranting an answer - he didn't really accuse him. However, it did its job in solidifying Fluffy's opinion on Tarballs, which means it's hardly nothing. So, I think Spinach thought it was either him or Tarballs, and attempted to make sure it's gonna be Tarballs.
3) His aforementioned post 180 is more than far-fetched, it's outright speculation coming out of nowhere. He says the mafia were "obviously trying to isolate someone". I disagree. There's no way to know how much importance the mafia gives to the private discussions. Also, isolation isn't necessarily a goal per se. Any person dead hampers the communication. So, the argument is a very slippery slope, very conveniently leading to a not-so-thinly-veiled semi-accusation towards Tarballs.

Fluffy:
What I've said before. Nothing really new here.

Tarballs:
It seems perfectly possible to me that a town player would act the way he acts. Also, I like his cool reaction to the votes against him. If he was scum, I'd expect him to be much more agitated and defensive - his partner was just lynched D1 and now he gets two votes on the very beginning of D2. Very annoying indeed. But he seems pretty calm, and doesn't attempt to convince Locke or Fluffy to unvote, as he quite logically explains in post 207. Of course, he might be scum playing a good game. But my read on him is neutral.

Henrz:
Post 189 is weird. "kinda yes but no"? You seem very agitated about this.


I'm not voting Spinach because that'll put him at L-1, if I'm not mistaken (4 to lynch, Locke and Tarballs are both voting him).

[KittyMo]

I'm working on an analysis of everyone. A lot of my reads have changed since I've read the thread multiple times, and am reading people's posts in isolation. It might be a while, though, since in another game (also on Day 2) there's 1 or 2 days til the deadline, and we pretty much have no idea who we're lynching. So I have to give that one priority...

Should have my analysis finished before the end of tomorrow, though, since this thread isn't very long. Thanks for understanding.

- Kitty

[Locke Lamora]

I'm definitely leaning towards Spinach at this point. We need to hear more out of him and Hernz in particular.

[Henrz]

I agree you need some more input from me, so therefore I'ma going to analyse, and it will be very througher.

[KittyMo]

Well, I'm half done. I'll go ahead and post the first half.

Locke Lamora:
He scumhunts, asks good questions, and gets discussion going. Haven't noticed any scumtells from him.
Read: Leaning town

Fluffy/DNW:
The more I think about it, DNW seemed like he voted a bit early. Either he is really excited about getting out of the RVS, which makes sense, or he was bussing Starbuck, which also makes sense. Fluffy doesn't seem to have really contributed anything; I get somewhat of an active lurking vibe from him.
Read: Neutral (but if I had to lean either way, I'd say slight scum)

Henrz:
Hmmm, he confuses me a little. He joined the site in April '09, so I suppose he's kind of a newbie, so that might explain some of his actions. I think the self-vote was a null tell, but he's said some things that sound weird and he seems to be lurking.

Uhh? Random Vote? Vote: Droid.

This seems awkward.

Ye, I agree, but I have nothing to say really... I tend to play exactly the same if I'm Town, or if I'm Scum, so it's really hard to tell with me.

Avoiding the question?

Oops, sorry, In answer. Kinda yes... But, I was meaning like after his defence, not before, and even then maybe not, but yeah, I kinda was. Bus NOT a speedlynch.

Why so uncertain? >.>

Read: Slightly Scummy

[KittyMo]

V/LA Tomorrow...I have to go do this beach scavenger hunt thing. Weird, huh?

[Henrz]

Okie Dokie, right I'ma going to start with Locke

DNW: my point was that it didn't need to be probed. Starbuck missed the line that said the questions were for everyone, saw it later and decided to answer them. It wasn't that he'd deliberately avoided answering them (or if he did, he lied about it, which you have no way of knowing anyway). That's why I thought it was a bit of a pointless question and the beginnings of an unfounded attack. If he'd said 'I don't want to answer the questions' then changed his mind, it would have been more relevant.

Right this is Locke's first defence of who we now know to be scum, Starbuck, albeit it was only a slight defence of a largely pointless (in my view), which is why I would take this as a first offence (kinda). Now this doesn't look like much if it's just on its own, like it is. But...

Other people have commented that I generally come off as pro-town, so I'd say that's a fair comment.

On Hernz's self vote: not really sure what it was he thought we'd discuss; Tarballs pretty much covered the main points. Backing up Droideka and then self-voting seems a little odd to me, especially at this stage of the game.

Unvote; Vote Hernz

Hernz: were you referring to my vote when you said the random vote doesn't really help? It wasn't random; admittedly there wasn't a big case behind it, but I did have a reason for it.

Right this; is one of my main reasons for concern, I didn't really give it much thought at the time but thinking about it it is quite a large offence. Putting someone who had just done one thing at L-1 so quickly without basically anything backing it up (mainly because we thought that he genuinely didn't see it and Monkey was a better candidate and other stuff). It could easily be a scum slip and then as soon as you realised that you might get outed early on, you quickly unvoted, then voted the person before you, which took a lot of pressure of yourself.

And then basically all of P5 you were defending me (kinda) which I think, after just voting me then unvoting, is a bit of backtracking, and I dont really like that (I could give an example but all you need to do is look)... But then of course he went and Voted Starbuck and such which lead to his lynch. And I'm going to post each person in a different post, because I nearly lost this . And I don't want to lose it when I've done EVERYONE. (So don't think I'ma picking on you Locke :p).

[Henrz]

Right, Monkey/Kitty next (Although mainly Monkey because Kitty hasn't posted much yet).

I have an idea...we could play "Two Truths And A Lie"...nice icebreaker game...people post three statements, two of which are true, and one of which is false, and people try to guess which is the false one. For example...

I've played in the marching band of a Rose Bowl game.

I'm a Taurus.

I have two middle names.

Right, it looks like here (I know it's a while back ) he's doing off topic things to make the game go out of the RVS OR just to stall it which it was, we may never know, but the game stalled anyway until my Selfvote, so...

You weren't encouraging random

voting

, per se, but you did encourage going back to random and idle discussion, which cannot develop into anything useful.

I think the current line of questioning of Starbuck is rather useless and superficial, and you don't know that my ideas of discussion is useless...

This is defending Starbuck here (kinda) because he's saying it's useless the argument against her and that his game is better, which seems kinda weird to me because questioning is better than playing something COMPLETELY off-topic.

Yeah, self voting just draws attention to yourself, which is not pro town.

Vote: Henrz

This is just a blatant Bandwagon, no reasoning AT ALL and he gave 0% Evidence to support what he'd done, he didn't even say "I agree with Tarballs" or something like that, just, it's scummy.

Unvote; Vote: MonkeyMan

I didn't notice that he'd voted for Hernz when I did. I don't see how drawing attention to yourself is not pro-town in itself. Still got my eye on Hernz and Droideka now that Droideka has defended Hernz too, though.

Drawing attention to yourself is not pro town because it is not scum hunting.

This is just weird, so therefore in a sense he's meaning that if you don't scum hunt in every post, you're scum, it doesn't go right AT ALL.

I didn't know she was at level one. I was just voting for who I thought was scummiest. I didn't see the Hertz vote going anywhere and I'm trying to help the town.

Generally, I would call BS on that, but as Spinach said, there was no Votes to lynch, so it could easily be an honest mistake (and a good mistake at that) that's why I think he Almost CERTAINLY isn't scum, which also means that Kitty isn't scum.

Well, for now, here's my reads on people (in alphabetical order):

Fluffy = leaning town
Henrz = slight town
Locke Lamora = leaning town
ODDin = neutral
Spinach = neutral
Tarballs = slight scum

I've had kind of a busy day today, so I don't have much more than that. (More stuff coming later, though.) In general, though, I think this game is off to a great start, and I'm really liking the discussion. =]

I know it probably means nothing but... You kinda changed me in the spur of the moment .

Well, I'm half done. I'll go ahead and post the first half.

Locke Lamora:
He scumhunts, asks good questions, and gets discussion going. Haven't noticed any scumtells from him.
Read: Leaning town

Fluffy/DNW:
The more I think about it, DNW seemed like he voted a bit early. Either he is really excited about getting out of the RVS, which makes sense, or he was bussing Starbuck, which also makes sense. Fluffy doesn't seem to have really contributed anything; I get somewhat of an active lurking vibe from him.
Read: Neutral (but if I had to lean either way, I'd say slight scum)

Henrz:
Hmmm, he confuses me a little. He joined the site in April '09, so I suppose he's kind of a newbie, so that might explain some of his actions. I think the self-vote was a null tell, but he's said some things that sound weird and he seems to be lurking.

Uhh? Random Vote? Vote: Droid.

1.This seems awkward.

Ye, I agree, but I have nothing to say really... I tend to play exactly the same if I'm Town, or if I'm Scum, so it's really hard to tell with me.

2.Avoiding the question?

Oops, sorry, In answer. Kinda yes... But, I was meaning like after his defence, not before, and even then maybe not, but yeah, I kinda was. Bus NOT a speedlynch.

3.Why so uncertain? >.>

Read: Slightly Scummy

But anyways.
1. Well, funnily enough that was my first first post EVER in a mafia game and my first theme on MafiaScum so I wasn't to sure how you do it here, because I know that the playstyle differs A LOT between places.
2. It was never a question.
3. I don't think I was uncertain, I was just trying to mask it with "confusion" because I knew it was really the wrong thing to say (although the truth).

[Spinach]

Spinach:
1) He didn't vote for Starbuck.

Excuse me for not jumping on the last minute bandwagon. And not voting for a person who at that point I didn't think was scum would be ridiculous. You think I'm scummy for being wrong. We're all wrong sometimes. Plus you think Tarballs is perfectly town, but he didn't vote for Starbuck either. If you're going to apply the 'you didn't vote the scum, you must be scum!1!!' you have to apply it to him too.

2) This has been brought up by Locke and Fluffy, and they voted Tarballs. He then follows to gently push against Tarballs himself, in a somewhat wishy-washy manner. He's raising a suspicion, and then saying it's probably nothing. It's a classical way to attempt a win-win. When Tarballs questions him, he just says it's nothing, thus not warranting an answer - he didn't really accuse him. However, it did its job in solidifying Fluffy's opinion on Tarballs, which means it's hardly nothing. So, I think Spinach thought it was either him or Tarballs, and attempted to make sure it's gonna be Tarballs.

What do you mean I thought it was either me or tarballs? How could one make that assumption so early in the day? And it could easily be someone besdies me or tarballs for the lynch today. And the only reason I didn't vote because it would be a) Bandwagoning and b) Put Tarballs at L-1.

3) His aforementioned post 180 is more than far-fetched, it's outright speculation coming out of nowhere. He says the mafia were "obvsiously trying to isolate someone". I disagree. There's no way to know how much importance the mafia gives to the private discussions. Also, isolation isn't necessarily a goal per se. Any person dead hampers the communication. So, the argument is a very slippery slope, very conveniently leading to a not-so-thinly-veiled semi-accusation towards Tarballs.

It wasn't speculation coming out of nowhere. Starbuck was a silencer, so it means that since one of the mafia role's goal was to hamper communication, then wouldn't the goal of the whole mafia be the same thing?

[Locke Lamora]

What do you mean I thought it was either me or tarballs? How could one make that assumption so early in the day? And it could easily be someone besdies me or tarballs for the lynch today. And the only reason I didn't vote because it would be a) Bandwagoning and b) Put Tarballs at L-1.

Because both Fluffy and myself had indicated you and Tarballs as top suspects and we'd both voted for Tarballs. I had made it particularly clear that I thought it was you or Tarballs. Once Fluffy had voted for Tarballs too, you then suggested your theory, further implicating him but without actually voting him as this would, as you say, have put him at L-1, thus looking incredibly scummy.

[Fluffy]

3. I don't think I was uncertain, I was just trying to mask it with "confusion" because I knew it was really the wrong thing to say (although the truth).

So you were faking being uncertain? Why would you do that? Because it would seem scummy?

[Tarballs]

I'm not voting Spinach because that'll put him at L-1, if I'm not mistaken (4 to lynch, Locke and Tarballs are both voting him).

After what happened yesterday, I'd say that's somewhat understandable. But why don't you want to put someone on L-1? If you're suspicious about someone, you shouldn't be afraid to vote.

2) This has been brought up by Locke and Fluffy, and they voted Tarballs. He then follows to gently push against Tarballs himself, in a somewhat wishy-washy manner. He's raising a suspicion, and then saying it's probably nothing. It's a classical way to attempt a win-win. When Tarballs questions him, he just says it's nothing, thus not warranting an answer - he didn't really accuse him. However, it did its job in solidifying Fluffy's opinion on Tarballs, which means it's hardly nothing. So, I think Spinach thought it was either him or Tarballs, and attempted to make sure it's gonna be Tarballs.

What do you mean I thought it was either me or tarballs? How could one make that assumption so early in the day? And it could easily be someone besdies me or tarballs for the lynch today. And the only reason I didn't vote because it would be a) Bandwagoning and b) Put Tarballs at L-1.

The same applies here. And bandwagoning isn't automatically a bad thing.

Starbuck was a silencer, so it means that since one of the mafia role's goal was to hamper communication, then wouldn't the goal of the whole mafia be the same thing?

Not necessarily. I think they can choose themselves how they want to approach the game and how to best utilize their roles. And we don't know what the remaining scum's role is.

[KittyMo]

Personal problems. I will have the rest of the analysises sometime tomorrow, I promise.

[Spinach]

Starbuck was a silencer, so it means that since one of the mafia role's goal was to hamper communication, then wouldn't the goal of the whole mafia be the same thing?

Not necessarily. I think they can choose themselves how they want to approach the game and how to best utilize their roles. And we don't know what the remaining scum's role is.

You see like you know there is one scum left. There can still be two scum left or other anti-town roles.

What do you mean I thought it was either me or tarballs? How could one make that assumption so early in the day? And it could easily be someone besdies me or tarballs for the lynch today. And the only reason I didn't vote because it would be a) Bandwagoning and b) Put Tarballs at L-1.

Because both Fluffy and myself had indicated you and Tarballs as top suspects and we'd both voted for Tarballs. I had made it particularly clear that I thought it was you or Tarballs. Once Fluffy had voted for Tarballs too, you then suggested your theory, further implicating him but without actually voting him as this would, as you say, have put him at L-1, thus looking incredibly scummy.

I don't recall you making it clear. You gave your feelings on everyone, but only voted Tarballs. It would've made more sense if you were to indicate other people you thought were scummy, maybe with a list of some sort, because the way you posted it (175) had left the back door open to infer who was most scummiest after Tarballs. And fluffy said it was tarballs/me/hernz, not tarballs/me.

[Locke Lamora]

I didn't flat-out say 'either Spinach or Tarballs is scum', no. What I did say was that neither of you really attacked Starbuck like other players were doing, I didn't think ODDin, Fluffy or MonkeyMan were and I figured Hernz was an outside chance. I didn't think I needed to help you along any more than that. I was indicating that Hernz included you and Tarballs among his top suspects, not that you were the only people he thought might be scum.

As for the scum comment, I think three scum in a nine-player game would be pretty harsh and would also give them quite a lot of influence in the circle.

Kitty, Hernz: I don't think we've covered this; did either of you say anything to Starbuck, or get anything back? I don't know if you get told what Monkey said/received, Kitty.

[KittyMo]

3. I don't think I was uncertain, I was just trying to mask it with "confusion" because I knew it was really the wrong thing to say (although the truth).

You've gotten me confused.... Huh? :s

Kitty, Hernz: I don't think we've covered this; did either of you say anything to Starbuck, or get anything back? I don't know if you get told what Monkey said/received, Kitty.

I wasn't told anything about what Monkey talked about. =/ I never got to to daytalk with anyone, either, since by the time I replaced in both of them were dead.

ODDin:
I find him protown. He raises good points, asks good questions, all that good stuff. Hasn't done anything scummy. He just needs to post more often.
Read: Slight town

I have to go now but I'll be back with Spinach & Tarballs' before the end of the day.

[Spinach]

I didn't flat-out say 'either Spinach or Tarballs is scum', no. What I did say was that neither of you really attacked Starbuck like other players were doing, I didn't think ODDin, Fluffy or MonkeyMan were and I figured Hernz was an outside chance. I didn't think I needed to help you along any more than that. I was indicating that Hernz included you and Tarballs among his top suspects, not that you were the only people he thought might be scum.

This is again, you yelling at me because I was wrong. People have different feelings toward certain players. So I thought Starbuck was town, and monkey was scum at that point. Not everybody has to attack the same person, and someone not attacking someone based on ( what I thought dumb) reasons is not a scumtell.

[Locke Lamora]

Not attacking someone based on dumb reasons is not a scumtell, no. However, someone not attacking a player who flips scum is not something that should be ignored, I think you'd agree. If I read through and said 'well, all these players voted for Starbuck but Tarballs and Spinach didn't...but the reasons were stupid anyway, so they're not likely to be scum' then I think I'd be guilty of ignoring some pretty obvious voting evidence.

[Fluffy]

As for the scum comment, I think three scum in a nine-player game would be pretty harsh and would also give them quite a lot of influence in the circle.

I agree, the game has to be balanced, consider a newbie game which is balanced with 9 people and 2 scum and 1 power role, so it's highly unlikely that there would be 3 scum.

Kitty, Hernz: I don't think we've covered this; did either of you say anything to Starbuck, or get anything back? I don't know if you get told what Monkey said/received, Kitty.

you don't get told about daytalk, that's why when I replaced in, I asked my neighbours..

[ODDin]

I'm not voting Spinach because that'll put him at L-1, if I'm not mistaken (4 to lynch, Locke and Tarballs are both voting him).

After what happened yesterday, I'd say that's somewhat understandable. But why don't you want to put someone on L-1? If you're suspicious about someone, you shouldn't be afraid to vote.

I don't want to allow the scum to hammer quickly, in case Spinach isn't actually scum. I see no point in taking this risk where nothing can be gained.

Spinach: I'm not voting for you *only* because you haven't voted for Starbuck. Of course, in isolation, this isn't a strong argument. But as Locke has said, this is a small game. Voting patterns are important, and not voting for scum has to be taken into consideration. Yes, I'm aware of the fact that you could've been a townie not agreeing with the arguments on Starbuck. I believe everyone here has, as town, not agreed with arguments against someone who later flipped scum. And yet, this counts as an argument against you. Believe me, I'd never vote for someone if not voting scum was my *only* argument against them.

[KittyMo]

Spinach:
He's said a few odd things, but he's also brought up a lot of things no one else noticed. However, he doesn't always seem to be scumhunting, just bringing stuff up, then brushing it off if no one else agrees. Hmmmm.

>:( I find it delicious.

Vote: MonkeyMan576

I hate monkeys

OMGUS random vote? :/

You're kidding me. You know what you did. Stop playing dumb.

Isn't that a little harsh?[/quote]

Also, while we're on the topic of Tarballs, I realized something.
I realized that (from the nightkill) the mafia have another goal in this game: to hamper communication.
Then I looked at the nightkill. They were obviously trying to isolate someone, and they could do it in two ways:
a) Kill Droid and isolate Monkey. (the outcome)
b) Kill Tarballs and isolate Hernz.

So I have a question: Why was option a chosen over option b? Could Tarballs be scum, rendering option b impossible? I know it seems... far-fetched, but I'd just like to throw it out there while we're talking about him.

I'm not sure how I feel about this...it was worth pointing out, but the WIFOM part seems...incomplete?[/quote]

Yeah, I had thought of it as useless until Starbuck died, then I realized we could have an all-silencer mafia.

This statement also seems odd, but I can't place why.

Read: Slight scum

[Tarballs]

I'm not voting Spinach because that'll put him at L-1, if I'm not mistaken (4 to lynch, Locke and Tarballs are both voting him).

After what happened yesterday, I'd say that's somewhat understandable. But why don't you want to put someone on L-1? If you're suspicious about someone, you shouldn't be afraid to vote.

I don't want to allow the scum to hammer quickly, in case Spinach isn't actually scum. I see no point in taking this risk where nothing can be gained.

Would it really be that bad if scum quickhammered? They're not going to win the game right here by doing that, and then we'd just lynch them tomorrow. If anything, I'd be very happy if scum decided to quickhammer. If this was lylo, your careful approach would be understandable, but we're not anywhere close to it.

[ODDin]

Tarballs: If they actually quickhammered, it'd be great, sure. I'm more afraid of the vote hanging there for some time, and then someone will come along and hammer with a huge post of reasoning. And oops, what do you know, he flipped town. I'm counting on the scum to hammer so that we don't suspect them, and don't want to give them the opportunity.
Also, what with yesterday's ending, I'm quite afraid of town player mistakenly hammering as well. We might not be so lucky second time in a row.

(Also, happy scumday )

On a different note, Henrz made some interesting notes on Locke, though I think I'd want to reread the game to better decide my take on that.
What I find very strange, however, is that Locke has posted after Henrz's post - yet didn't say anything about the accusations raised against himself.
He did, however, rise up to answer a question directed at me and clarifying what I have said (and I don't think I've made the impression so far that I cannot explain what I'm saying - correct me if I'm wrong). This might be buddying to an extent.

Mod: could you please write "X votes to lynch" in the vote counts?

[Spinach]

ODDin: Understood. I just don't see why you didn't apply it to Tarballs, who you think is perfectly town.


KittyMo:
1) Yes, OMGUS random vote. Just poking fun at that point. What can I say? It was the random voting stage.

2) Yes, It was a little harsh. Don't see how being harsh = scummy.

3) What do you mean the WIFOM seems incomplete?

4) When you figure it out, feel free to run it by me, I'll explain.

And about the LL case: I'd like to point out the if you look at his posts in isolation, notice posts 7, 8, and 9 all contain Unvote, votes. Votehopping much?