Newbie 841 - Game over!

[Pablo Molinero]

Whoo, first vote!

Vote: OMGLyncher

, because, well, just look at his name.

[Pablo Molinero]

Aw, not first vote.

Fail.

[Pablo Molinero]

Unvote

OMGLyncher is handing out FoS's like Halloween candy and I have no idea what to make of Toro's almost panicked talking about wagons. Panicked vibe (that I also get with the smiley-posting-style) makes me lean towards scum.

[quote]Whats your gender T-chan? [quote]

...really? Check out the gender symbol under her name.

[Pablo Molinero]

*What kind of slips do you think scum can give in the random voting stage??

Since DeathNote has already posted, I'll pipe in and say that random votes in newbie games never seem to yield anything of value (in my expereince). While they help "get the ball rolling" so to speak, in the end they're just an irrelevant starting point. That faster we're out of the RVS, the better.

[Pablo Molinero]

Tororingu-Chan...How many games have you played? Actually, I'd love it if everyone could answer that one for me please.

Er... 12-15 on mafiascum. Way too many to count IRL.

[Pablo Molinero]

I just realized that Pablo is an IC yet he hardly writes. That is reasonaly but
shouldn't he tell us tips or ways to play? Also, he unvoted when the RVS started to end which can be anti-scummy, especially if there is no reason for unvoting.

Toro beat me to the punch. You can rely on me for specific gameplay questions and I'll point out glaring errors or fallacies if I see them. Otherwise, I'm just here to win the game for the town like (most of) the rest of you.

Right now I'm trying something different from my normal style and I'm just riding out the first few pages so I can get a good read on everyone. Then the scum hunting will commence.

[Pablo Molinero]

Eh... Pablo's last post, which went along the lines of:
"Hey you townies, you can't trust me just because I'm the IC, I'm only here to win the game

for the town.

" strikes me as a very odd and contradictory sort of comment to me.... o_O;; Is it just me???

What were you thinking when you wrote that, Pablo?? @_@;;;

"Hey townies, try to not look at my IC status like it's anything special, I'm townie and trying to win with you. If you're scum, you can screw off."

Yes.

How is it contradictory? You're reaching hard, and you know it.

[Pablo Molinero]

You know what, this whole "sit back for a few pages" thing just doesn’t do it for me. It sounded better when I was first doing it. (Yeesh, I don't post for a freakin' day and I already have people saying "the IC doesn’t post enough?! I'm offended good sirs and madams!) I've reread the thread and have some decent reads on people.

Vote: OMGLyncher

The reasons are two-fold. Firstly, he prefaces his RVS vote with "OMGUSVote:" so we're really, super sure that he's not serious with his vote. Being overly cautious is sometimes forgivable in newbie games, but it is as a whole, mildly scummy. Secondly, he challenges a few idea on page 2, but when people come in to argue against him, he just sort of shuts down instead of pushing back. He hasn't posted anything since then and I feel like he's trying to stay out of sight after ruffling a few feathers.

Votes are our weapons, kiddies. If we sit back and look for people doing things scummy *cough*havingfitz*cough, you'll get NOWHERE and the game will die and/or get taken over by the scum. You have to be proactive and challenge people.

[Pablo Molinero]

Well that was a disappointing day. Either we're on the right track and the mafia are hiding or the mafia are scared to make a move.

Either way: let's pile on the votes!

[Pablo Molinero]

This town is way too tentative for it's own good (although it happens all the time in newbie games, so it's understandable.) You know what, I'm still cool with my vote on OMGLyncher. So far he's given us an admission that he's been suspicious and then he's done nothing to re-divert attention from himself. Why? I figure he's scum that knows he can't legitimately build a case on anyone else. I've had this problem before as scum, too, and I can easily see it being the same situation.

@ The people "watching" me give me reasons why, plz (and I laugh at your PC-language. If you find me suspicious, SAY SO)

Town, in general, don't be afraid to use your votes as weapons. At this point, you're not going to lynch someone simply by voting for them once. Nothing gets someone's attention like voting for them.

[Pablo Molinero]

Heh, while I do admit that my "playstyle" sequence posts looks odd (what was I thinking?!), you have to ask yourself if that odd behavior=scummy. I was going to ride out the next few days because I thought the town was going to be more active than it is. When it was apparent we have quite a few people here semi-lurking, I took it upon myself to push the town forward. Believe me: Quiet towns = Dead towns.

And yes, guess what, I STILL want people to pile on some votes. Anyone, anywhere: it is the #1 guaranteed way to spark a discussion.

I think you're looking at all the wrong reasons with your # 2 and 3, fitz. It appears to me that you're marking the 2 most active (content-wise) players simply because there's a lot of material to go off of with us. I'd be more concerned with the people NOT talking.

[Pablo Molinero]

Rawr. Getting back to school and trying to set up my compy on this blasted campus internets is a pain. Sorry about that, I was 2 days without good access.

It seems like OMG has disappeared on us. Great. Did I mention that I dislike playing against replacements?

[Pablo Molinero]

Replacements definitely will have to answer for everything their predecessor was responsible before. I would hate for scum to get off the hook merely because they're a new player in the game.

That said, havingfitz's current post/vote comes at a very bizarre time, in my opinion. OMGLyncher is very clearly AWOL and unable to currently defend himself AND clearly in need of a replacement, (which I'm sure VRK will get in no time once OMG misses his prod), and only then does havingfitz pops in with a vote and post encouraging the town to close this day out ("I won't find vote #5 scummy"), before a defense for OMG can be made. I hate replacements as much as the next guy, but to axe a player while gone without allowing them to retort... it

screams

scummy to me.

Yeah, I don't like OMG being at L-1, yet.

unvote, vote: havingfitz

[Pablo Molinero]

Hello, replacements. Sorry about not being around so much this week. Classes just started and I'm still getting settled in to school here. I think it's interesting that havingfitz immediately downgrades to a FoS after a real life person came along. Not only that, but the real-live person hasn't even posted a proper defense or response yet. Where did the gung-ho behavior go? What about keeping pressure on and making replacements answer for with their predecessor did? I'm fine where my vote is right now on havingfitz, who hasn't helped himself one bit with his recent actions, but I'd definitely like to see how Ray responds.

[Pablo Molinero]

havingfitz havingfitz havingfitz havingfitz havingfitz.

Huge surprise there. The way he handled the last week before dropping the hammer was incredibly scummy. Hopefully I'll find a break in homework (which I'm currently doing) sometime this week to give a longer post why and drop my vote on him.

[Pablo Molinero]

Post 70 -

Vote: OMGLyncher

The reasons are two-fold. Firstly,... Secondly, he challenges a few idea on page 2, but when people come in to argue against him, he just sort of shuts down instead of pushing back.

He hasn't posted anything since then and I feel like he's trying to stay out of sight after ruffling a few feathers.

Votes are our weapons, kiddies. If we sit back and look for people doing things scummy *cough*havingfitz*cough, you'll get NOWHERE and the game will die and/or get taken over by the scum. You have to be proactive and challenge people.

In post 70 he denounces people from doing what he just stated he was going to do

<post 64+70 = hypocrisy>

and makes a point of singling out me in regards to sitting back. Use your votes, be proactive and challenge people he says. Ok. He also votes for OMG and uses "He hasn't posted anything since then and I feel like he's trying to stay out of sight after ruffling a few feathers" as one of his reasons for his vote.

Hoooolllly crap, really? To the town, I present my whole post #70:

You know what, this whole "sit back for a few pages" thing just doesn’t do it for me. It sounded better when I was first doing it. (Yeesh, I don't post for a freakin' day and I already have people saying "the IC doesn’t post enough?! I'm offended good sirs and madams!) I've reread the thread and have some decent reads on people.

Vote: OMGLyncher

The reasons are two-fold. Firstly, he prefaces his RVS vote with "OMGUSVote:" so we're really, super sure that he's not serious with his vote. Being overly cautious is sometimes forgivable in newbie games, but it is as a whole, mildly scummy. Secondly, he challenges a few idea on page 2, but when people come in to argue against him, he just sort of shuts down instead of pushing back. He hasn't posted anything since then and I feel like he's trying to stay out of sight after ruffling a few feathers.

Votes are our weapons, kiddies. If we sit back and look for people doing things scummy *cough*havingfitz*cough, you'll get NOWHERE and the game will die and/or get taken over by the scum. You have to be proactive and challenge people.

You left out the first paragraph, and in doing so, are guilty of creating a reality that is convenient for your case. I specifically went back on the "sit back" mentality when it was apparent that I was being embarrassingly lazy and the town wasn't being too active. Sorry, when I address the issue myself, it isn't hypocrisy, you're just fabricating reality.

Post 91 -

...let's pile on the votes!

Ok.

Post 104 -

This town is way too tentative for it's own good. I'm still cool with my vote on OMGLyncher.

Town, in general, don't be afraid to use your votes as weapons. At this point, you're not going to lynch someone simply by voting for them once. Nothing gets someone's attention like voting for them.

Ok...don't be tentative and use your votes. You said that already but it still sounds like good advice.

Post 110 -

Believe me: Quiet towns = Dead towns.

And yes, guess what, I STILL want people to pile on some votes. Anyone, anywhere: it is the #1 guaranteed way to spark a discussion.

I think you're looking at all the wrong reasons with your # 2 and 3, fitz. It appears to me that you're marking the 2 most active (content-wise) players simply because there's a lot of material to go off of with us. I'd be more concerned with the people NOT talking.

Ok...I think I get it now. Be active and vote. Got it.

Note: at this point the two most active players were TC and DN. Pablo's 10 prior posts were within one or two posts of everyone else's in the game. Trying to divert attention from himself as one of the two most active players (which he wasn't) and steer attentions to the less active players, of whom he was actually right in line with and is now the leader of,

=hypocrisy IMO

Yes, I have not been the most active and I apologize for doing so. I was moving into the University of Cincinnati and my entire momentum in the game was demolished. I've been modding one game and playing in two and ever then barely able to keep up. I think I'll start to pick it up again as I post more and build a case, though.

Tearing apart the rest of your case will also build up my case against you, conveniently enough, so I'll make that a different post.

We need to look at the context of everything in the events of pages 5-9, something you're not looking at in your desperate attempt to build up a case.

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh look, another quote you cut down for the sake of your own case. For those keeping score, this is count #2 of havingfitz editing down reality to serve his case:

Heh, while I do admit that my "playstyle" sequence posts looks odd (what was I thinking?!), you have to ask yourself if that odd behavior=scummy. I was going to ride out the next few days because I thought the town was going to be more active than it is. When it was apparent we have quite a few people here semi-lurking, I took it upon myself to push the town forward.

Believe me: Quiet towns = Dead towns.

And yes, guess what, I STILL want people to pile on some votes. Anyone, anywhere: it is the #1 guaranteed way to spark a discussion.

I think you're looking at all the wrong reasons with your # 2 and 3, fitz. It appears to me that you're marking the 2 most active (content-wise) players simply because there's a lot of material to go off of with us. I'd be more concerned with the people NOT talking.

In 246, he cut the bolded part out so he could make a point THAT I ALREADY POINTED OUT MYSELF, AT THE TIME. Go up and check where he quoted this from me and see the difference. I don't like this one bit.

[Pablo Molinero]

Huh? I'm trying to be more active in the game. I give my reasons for thinking OMG is the scummiest person (whom you have been focusing on up to this point as well) and vote for him. In your limited number of posts you have urged activity (and used the lack of it as a reason to suspect OMG), prompted us to cast votes, stated your dislike of replacements, and cast suspicions towards OMG. In this one post you use basically all of these things you have espoused to shift suspicions towards me and change your vote from OMG to me. That IMO is several examples of hypocrisy lumped into one post.

Let's look at the context of each case:

OMG disappearing after being called out and voted for by several people: mildly scummy, possibly newbish.

Pablo being less active with no votes on him, but always present: a little lazy, but nothing more.

I am not comparable to OMG, so I think your label of hypocrisy in this case is invalid.

Bear with me, kiddies, and read this all. It will be worth your while.

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

Page 6:

Game is going SLOOOOOW and OMG is prodded, looking like he will not show up.

havingfitz posts this:

Well I'm looking at everyone as a possible mafia but for some I'm not seeing much if any. I'm just pointing out a few interesting observations IMO regarding Mitey. The lack of anything else going on has given a bit of time to do some nitpicking.

Also...with Vel being out of pocket around the first of Oct I'm crossing my fingers we get to the next day sooner than later. I know that sounds bad but this game is creeping along enough as it is.

He stalls, admitting that he can do nothing but nitpick in a game so slow.

And yet, havingfitz's next post is the vote is for OMG and pressures a hammer

before a replacement can be found

.

I don’t like replacements either...especially when they are for someone I suspect to be scummy. As I don’t have any suspicions of note vs. MafiaFailure I don’t think a replacement for him would be the worst thing. On the other hand, I do think a replacement on OMG would suck. Even if the replacement was active and coherent I would still have difficulty getting past the fact the person he replaced (OMG) had given me reason to suspect that combined “OMG & replacement” position. (

Yes, I have this problem, too, but to not even give the person a chance? It's too extreme

) I am definitely not a fan of no-lynching as I think the only ones a no-lynch helps is mafia, as they essentially get a free Day one pass and get to deplete the townies by one at no risk. It also robs the rest of us to opportunity to analyze the votes that were cast. (

reasonable

)

I know putting someone at L-1 is usually seen as a bad thing but I think the current situation in our game, i.e. we seem to be stuck in neutral save a handful of players with OMG being viewed as the roadblock, warrants action (

being overly-defensive about your vote is scummy

). OMG has produced the most evidence for people to suspect him (either in initial actions or his defense and subsequent withdrawal) and in the interests of 1.) progressing the game, 2.) acting on the suspicions he has raised, and 3.) reducing the prospects of a replacement player by at least one (

What? Reducing the prospects of a replacement?!

), I Vote: OMGLyncher . If anyone else wants to moves things forward...now is your chance. (

And here you encourage the hammer, pressuring those who haven't voted to do so and finish this before more discussion can happen. Stifling discussion = majorly scummy. Why would you want less posts, and therefore information, for the town?

)

Note...as I read this post back to myself before submitting it I thought how I would view the person who potentially would place a 5th and deciding vote on OMG. I would have a hard time placing suspicions on the 5th vote on the basis of that vote itself. If I already had my doubts about a player those doubts would remain, but a 5th vote in this instance would not increase my suspicions. (

And here you pressure for the 5th vote in a different way, trying to coax the hammer-er into a sense of security. The hammer is NOT something to be taken this lightly.

) And while that sentiment would appear to take away some of the value earned in analyzing votes, on the chance we do get it right I think the value is still there. Realistically we were moving in the direction of an OMG lynch anyway (

We were a week and a half away from deadline here! Things can easily change in 9-10 days, but you saw the kill you wanted and pushed it hardcore.

) This just gets us there a bit quicker without the added confusion (for me at least) that the replacement of a player with the preponderance of suspicions would introduce (

Again, this reads as "discussion=bad" to me

).

(Bold is mine, obviously)

I back off at this point in the Day, because it's apparent we're getting a replacement. I dislike that as the next guy, but we were still waiting for an OMG reply, and we would finally get

something

with a replacement.

You call me hypocritical for doing this, and this is the cornerstone of your argument. Let's look at the reality:

- I pressure for activity/votes in a slow game. True.

- OMG votes pile up and I have no problem because I believe he is still playing.

- When it becomes apparent we need a replacement, havingfitz jumps on the vote-wagon.

- I back off. True. WHY? Because it's everyone's right to defend themselves, but you persist for the lynch. And

I'm

scummy for wanting the day to continue instead of cutting off discussion?

Your preemptive vote on me today also looks like panic and I'm not liking it. The biggest thing you've done today to add to my preexisting suspicion is selectively edit quotes for your non-existent arguments.

Yeah.

vote: havingfitz

[Pablo Molinero]

For reals.

[Pablo Molinero]

I have a small problem with one of your arguments Pablo. In a replay of the contentious Post 110:

Heh, while I do admit that my "playstyle" sequence posts looks odd (what was I thinking?!), you have to ask yourself if that odd behavior=scummy. I was going to ride out the next few days because I thought the town was going to be more active than it is. When it was apparent we have quite a few people here semi-lurking, I took it upon myself to push the town forward.

Believe me: Quiet towns = Dead towns.

And yes, guess what, I STILL want people to pile on some votes. Anyone, anywhere: it is the #1 guaranteed way to spark a discussion.

I think you're looking at all the wrong reasons with your # 2 and 3, fitz. It appears to me that you're marking the 2 most active (content-wise) players simply because there's a lot of material to go off of with us. I'd be more concerned with the people NOT talking.

The bolded part is what fitz omitted when he quoted you. The first part refers to whether or not people felt your admitted lurking and your comment on how you were 'winning for the town' was scummy. I think the answer to the first part for havingfitz is a definitive yes. His argument seemed to be that you were advocating a more active town, very early in day 1 was not one of the two most active posters (despite you claiming to be) and then later drifting off. This post is a part of a series, where you push for content and votes, is displayed.

If my interpretation is right, I don't think fitz was misrepresenting you here. If anything, it may add a little to the case against you. Your admittance to being quiet at one point, and yet on the same post stating that 'Quiet Towns = Dead towns', damages your defense, not enhances. The fact you pointed out your odd behaviour before he did? Yay. It doesn't change the charge of you having contradicting behaviour.

Really, admitting to fault and having some semblance of self-awareness before someone can point it out is a FAULT? Yikes, you have some messed-up priorities, if that's so.

Havingfitz, I know you're going to laugh me out of the building on this one: but I ask you to take a closer look at some others before trying to damn me completely. There are 4 other players that are relatively silent in the past few days. I appear to be on the losing side of this argument so far, (though I'd like to see what the

whole

town thinks about this), but it in my experience in the newbie games that the players not actively building cases: those piggybacking, simply agreeing, and staying silent (yeah, yeah, I know, I know) are those more likely to be scum.

As for you, the amount and "strength" of your replies throws you closer and closer to the "town" bin in my mind. While tunneling can be a good thing to bring out the best or worst in people, it can be dangerous at points, and I'm getting the feeling that this could be a "town vs town" matchup.

unvote

Questions:
@Pablo: The original question still stands: Did you find Ray scummy that you too would have hammered? Secondly, I currently find your case of misrepresentation lacking. In those two posts where you felt misrepresented, what were we to infer from those posts?

If forced to, due the deadline, I would have hammered, yes.

I'm under the impression that fitz has pointed out those two quotes to represent me contradicting myself. I encouraged votes, activity, and pressure, and I was lacking in the "activity" department. I'll give him that, but I addressed it myself (in the omitted parts) and have explained on multiple occasion what my mindset was. Therefore, I think it should be a null-point, but some of you choose to discount my words to be irrelevant. I think this is illogical.

btw, I still think that my "inactivity" versus OMG's is no comparison. OMG disappeared under heat. Completely. What am I doing? Defending myself and firing back. Does this kind of reaction change anything in your mind? And if not, why not?

[Pablo Molinero]

I'm gonna sit back for a while and go "hmm..yes...interesting. indeed."

Really? Why? How does the town benefit from this?

I think one of havingfitz and Pablo Molinero are scum. Which one would you guys side with based on what we have so far? I'm having trouble deciding.

A) Why me or fitz? Do you think it's impossible two townies would go after each other like this?

B) I don't like how you're gauging popular opinion to help determine your vote in this case. Looks like you're trying to jump on the winning side.

FoS: Rampage

[Pablo Molinero]

I'm a little bit V/L/A, not for long. Times have been busy all of a sudden.

Can't fault a guy for that, I know how it is. Just want to see everyone jump into the game is all.

[Pablo Molinero]

Yeah, the timing of his unvote/vote on Ray was only about 2 hours. Didn't take long for him to put his vote back on.

[Pablo Molinero]

...

Did he give a reason, VRK?

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh, you and your wacky Canadian Thanksgiving.

[Pablo Molinero]

God, I can't tell if that's ultimately scummy or just shamefully lazy.

[Pablo Molinero]

Oh crap. Uh...

EBWOP: Ronnieroo started her case on Pablo while I am writing. More to post on her later.

Sorry Ronnie!

Yeah, I don't know what you're looking at, cuz that wasn't a case against me.

Monday is my hell-day (all 5 classes + HW) so I'll try and show up later this week, but I make no promises for the weekend (21st B-day and all).

[Pablo Molinero]

Agreed on ABR. He has claimed away, but still has been nonexistant so much in this game. Thoughts instantly go to scum lurking/lacking a foothold.

[Pablo Molinero]

... really? That's all we get? You "think he's scum"? That post almost warranted my vote, but I'm trying to cut back on being QUITE so crazy throwing around my vote. Explain, because while "gut" may be good for you, it should not warrant a vote from anyone else. At least try.

[Pablo Molinero]

ON ABR:
Seems like everyone is commenting on that last post! I guess I'm the only one who liked it~~~ ^_^

Yeah, explain this. You're buddying pretty hard for no apparent reason.

[Pablo Molinero]

Albert, while I don't disagree 100% with your analysis (good call bringing up the lynchers on Day 1), you're headed into very grey territory by pairing people together before we know either scum.

[Pablo Molinero]

However, we know for a fact that there has to be at least ONE scum on the wagon, since you are the only one alive who wasn't on that wagon

Incorrect. ronnieroo was also not on that wagon.

[Pablo Molinero]

I dunno, while she has been even less active than me, she hasn't exactly been leading discussion or jumping on wagons. I am unconcerned with her at the present.

And you?

[Pablo Molinero]

Die in a fire, T-c. Or at least find something constructive instead of padding your post-count.

I have already stated my position on Fitz (that the him-vs-me is ultimately, likely, town fighting town). While I think he has been prone to some incredibly scummy things by mis-repping me, it has read to me more and more as town trying too hard as opposed to a scum-argument. You, on the other hand, have still done nothing to further your case against him and T-c seems to find that delightful. Rest of the town, feel free to chime in when you log in next.

[Pablo Molinero]

Anyway, just because someone doesn't play exactly the same way you do does not necessarily mean they are scum... just thought you should remember that.

Do you have any justification for a fitz vote, then? You seem to have no problem with it and ABR is giving very little help.

[Pablo Molinero]

NO U. Cry me a river.

Going back over your last page: While I see process of elimination here as a valid thought process, it also brings up the heavily-buddying pair of you/T-C in my mind. See my dilemma?

And yes, T-C, I know everyone doesn’t play like me, but I’m still allowed to not like them for it.

[Pablo Molinero]

@Pablo: Sifting through T-chan's spam may be annoying, but really harmless IMO.

Aye, I seem to have one of these moments per game I play in (letting a shitty day carry over in-game) and this seems to be it for this one. I apologize to T-C for the snapping. Unlike ABR, who seems to make it his gimmick, I'll try and hold myself to a higher standard for the rest of the game. Agreed, it is unnecessary.

ABR, you may not care what I think, but my vote holds the same amount of weight as yours.

[Pablo Molinero]

PE agreed with you and appears to have leaned towards my side of the PM/HF debate

What "debate"? Is someone continuing this and not telling me? Have you been reading my words? I have resigned from my side for the time being, as evidenced by my unvote and my whole lack-of-attacking-you.

Things have gotten too scattered for my liking: I'm going to do a reread of the entire day when I have time and post my new focus.

[Pablo Molinero]

"Before I go into my drunken 21st stupor and watch my Bearcats crush the Bulls, I think I'll just pop in to my games..." I say to myself.

Well done, T-C. (You just better really be cop.)

Vote: almightybob

[Pablo Molinero]

Guess: ronnieroo. Far too quiet for my liking.

...and back to hating Mondays.

[Pablo Molinero]

Come on, T-c, are you going to post the result soon or should we progress with the day?

[Pablo Molinero]

Long day (still doing HW) so I'll do a reread of almightybob interactions, the main thing we need to look at, tomorrow.

[Pablo Molinero]

First, I should address that “case” of yours. I’m not touching that Day 1 bullshit with a ten foot pole. It’s a weak point that fitz started championing and you’re just parroting/running with the baton. It was weak then and weak now. Know why: ABR DID THE EXACT SAME THING DAY 2. And yet, no one called him out on it.

Don’t believe me?

ABR’s first post on Day 2:

Ah crap. You guys been here since the beginning, who do you think is scum? I'm gonna sit back for a while and go "hmm..yes...interesting. indeed."

It’s hypocritical that no one comments on this and shows that I’m being tunneled in on for something trivial. You and fitz can yell about it all you want but it’s not going to make it any less crap.

Your Day 2 argument seems to revolve around me “distancing” myself from bob. In conclusion: I don’t say a whole lot about bob due to me attacking fitz and then moving on to focus on ABR. During this time, all the while T-c is grilling bob. And you don’t think scum-me would jump in and defend him or deflect for him? It does not add up. At this point we don’t know that T-c is cop so why would scum throw his floundering partner to the wolves?

I'm building more to the case, just wanted to get that out there first.

[Pablo Molinero]

And one more point:

Let’s look at the townie lynch and what we know.

RayFrost - 5 (Tororingu-chan, PaltryExcuse, DeathNote, Albert B. Rampage, havingfitz)

T-c: Cop
Paltry: ?
DeathNote: Scum
ABR: Doc
Fitz: ?


Okay, then let’s take a look at the scum-lynch:

almightybob - 4 (Albert B. Rampage, havingfitz, almightybob, Pablo Molinero)

ABP: Doc
Fitz: ?
Almightybob: Self-vote
Pablo: ?

What do we see solely based on this? Simple enough.

Paltry: scummy (voted for townie lynch, stayed out of scum lynch)
Fitz: scummy (voted for townie lynch and scum lynch after the Cop claimed)
Pablo: neutral (stayed out of townie lynch, voted for scum lynch after the Cop claimed)

Back to my analysis. Obviously, I know scum was driving 2 votes on the first lynch. Now I gotta figure out which one of you it is.

[Pablo Molinero]

I said at the beginning of Day 3 that we need to look at Deathnote/bob interactions, which you took to simply jump on me. There is no indication that you looked at anyone else, but go right after me with a pretty flimsy case. Why? I can guess: you know fitz has been gunning after me since Day 1 and I wasn’t exactly cordial to T-c yesterday. I’m the prime target for a mislynch and it feels like you’re trying to take advantage. You jumped for your vote quick and I don't like it.

Let’s turn this analysis around and look at your (Paltry) interactions with Deathnote/bob on Day 2:

@DeathNote: You posted once that you were watching Pablo, and later pursued Pablo on his argument against fitz. Are you still 'watching' Pablo or has any of that changed into a more definite suspicion and why?

Question that looks a little leading towards yours truly.

Grumble-cloud. I have to say I was reading the case on DeathNote, thought we actually have a scum, and now I've learned he's disappearing. Less than happy. Hopefully nothing bad happened to DeathNote himself. I think now the replacement has a lot to answer for, (a completely unresponded case). If, as T-chan said, he does not leave his other games or at least go V/LA it's going to paint an ugly target on his back. I would also like to hear the reason why he is leaving.

- You say that it’s a good case and then proceed not to do anything abut it.

I don't like that logic. If you want more action in a game you do something about it. I admit I was looking for more commentary, but it's equally possible that life just got in the way of things for some. I might have said more, but T-chan's lone post of 'What...' is kinda what I wanna get across.

-About DN’s disappearance.

-] Mafia-rific [-
DeathNote/replacement: At this point, the strongest case against anyone has got to be DeathNote. The point that struck the hardest was the fact that he seems to follow the club without asking any questions. He votes when everyone else is, unvotes when others seem to. That is the scariest part. As I said, actions speak louder than words, and his actions are not pro-town.

Oh… wow. Really. This genuinely surprised me. You’re calling more attention to a potential scumbuddy. Either epic bussing or a very townie indicator for Paltry.

On Bob's defense:
So far, pretty sound on the points put forth. The posts seem to indicate he believes it to be so, and then quickly changes his mind. Basically, the way things have been written, DN seems positive at times of OMG's scummy-ness and sees it as newbie behaviour in others. One question really: Bob, in your opinion, when is DN convinced of OMG being scum enough to keep his vote on him until the lynch?

“Pretty sound” and yet says right after bob is unsure of himself. Very confusing post.

@Bob: I think the major problem with your argument as of right now is that one post. It's still making you look suspicious in my eyes. On the other hand, the volume of posts where DeathNote points towards NewbScum is a plus on your side. I'm watching you.

You’re watching him and yet don’t think it’s suspicious enough to garner a vote. You appear to be coming around to his defense.

-----------

Your playstyle as a whole seems very much into moderating discussion, commenting here and there, and asking questions to lead discussion to where you want it to go without having to participate too much yourself. But the big thing: you don’t seem to come up with a while lot of original conclusions/attacks. Aside from today, you’ve done a good job at riding the wave and staying out of the spotlight. You jumped pretty hard onto fitz’s case against me and parroted a LOT of points as scummy/lazy sort of action.

I’m going to do the same look at fitz later tonight and then come up with my vote. In the meantime, people, discuss.

Innocents: T-c and Starbuck, what do you think?

[Pablo Molinero]

What do I think? ^_^
Hmmm... I'm starting to think you may be scum~ xD

Reasons plz. This better have been brought on by sleep deprivation.

[Pablo Molinero]

And one more point:

Let’s look at the townie lynch and what we know.

RayFrost - 5 (Tororingu-chan, PaltryExcuse, DeathNote, Albert B. Rampage, havingfitz)

T-c: Cop
Paltry: ?
DeathNote: Scum
ABR: Doc
Fitz: ?

I would add one more
Pablo Molinero: ?

Questions:
@Pablo: The original question still stands: Did you find Ray scummy that you too would have hammered? Secondly, I currently find your case of misrepresentation lacking. In those two posts where you felt misrepresented, what were we to infer from those posts?

If forced to, due the deadline, I would have hammered, yes.

You can join me and fitz on that vote because you would have hammered. You said so. OMG was acting scummy. T-chan, our cop, led the lynch. You also were the first to get a vote onto OMG.
Long story short, it's hard for any of the three of us to absolve ourselves in this situation as we all were willing to lynch him. Deadline or not.

Okay, then let’s take a look at the scum-lynch:

almightybob - 4 (Albert B. Rampage, havingfitz, almightybob, Pablo Molinero)

ABP: Doc
Fitz: ?
Almightybob: Self-vote
Pablo: ?

What do we see solely based on this? Simple enough.

Paltry: scummy (voted for townie lynch, stayed out of scum lynch)
Fitz: scummy (voted for townie lynch and scum lynch after the Cop claimed)
Pablo: neutral (stayed out of townie lynch, voted for scum lynch after the Cop claimed)

Back to my analysis. Obviously, I know scum was driving 2 votes on the first lynch. Now I gotta figure out which one of you it is.

So Pablo would now have:
Pablo: scummy (would have lynched a townie, voted for scum lynch after the Cop claimed)
That's a bit more accurate. Secondly, about the second lynch, I just wasn't online to vote when you, ABR, fitz, and Bob himself all voted for him. I have class on Thursday's from 10:00am until 2:30pm, plus I usually grab something to eat with my friend and we muck around on campus. I wasn't home until after Bob had been lynched and VRK had closed the thread.
The fact that you and fitz voted for Bob after he admitted he was scum is a null-tell for me. Yay, scum admits they're scum and you vote for them. Really it was just a matter of time before enough people logged on for Bob to be lynched. So if we do go on those votes alone, everyone is on an equal playing field. Your points just seem like a red herring.

Correct, the mafia lynch is a null-tell. I'm not faulting you for not being on it. Congrats, you managed to parrot my point to try and make it your own.

But the townie-lynch is not a null-tell. I said,

if forced due to deadline

, that I would lynch Ray. Because that's the right move for town no matter who is being lynched. Even if I'm 99% sure they are town. A Day 1 lynch in a newbie game is ALWAYS advantageous over a No-Lynch. The difference between you and fitz and me is that you actively sought out the lynch while I wanted to pursue other avenues (fitz at that moment). You can not logically lump me in with you two so stop trying. You lynched a townie, I did not.

And before you even come back with some elaborate-scum theory, let's be real here. Scum does not sit back, rubbing their hands, going "Muahaahahaha, the town is doing my bidding." No. They're right there on the town-lynch wagons 99 times of 100, pushing it along. You're trying WAY too hard. "Red herrings" rarely exist in mafia, especially in a standard newbie game.

I did comment. You're right, I didn't hold it over his head as vehemently as I have with yours, however I did try to get him to respond.

Sense: it makes none.

My case says: no, that makes no sense. How does someone ignore a case that is going on right around them?

EXACTLY! How does scum ignore a case right in front of them against their scumbuddy? Particularly when we don't know the guilty result. Surely they would make some sort of casual attempt to clear their pal. In fact, both you and fitz commented on the case IN FAVOR OF DN/BOB and sort of dismissed it until the guilty result came. How am I the scummy one, then? If I'm scummy due to this, you two are scummy^100. Your case is hypocritical at best, self-damning at worst, and simply does not hold water.

I'll hopefully complete my analysis today or early tomorrow.

[Pablo Molinero]

fitz comments on DN/Bob:

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

Can not believe DeathNote has bailed. Without saying anything personal I think if you start something (especially with a group of other people) you should finish it.

A little more up in arms about this than others. Interesting.

I have been reading over each individual's posts the last few days and I don't feel like I am getting anywhere.

I thought TC made some good observations on DN but when I looked closer I think I came to some of the same conclusions Bob has used in DN's defense. I'm not convinced DN is mafia.

Also...I'm having a hard time pinning down suspicions on TC, Roo, and PE. I'm still maintaining my suspicions towards Pablo but I think I'm starting to get a scummy feel from ABR. ABR came in right off the bat with attacks towards RayFrost (who at the time was the scum leader for several people...including me). He threw a quick vote out on Roo...even though he seemed focused on RF/OMG. He then urged everyone to vote...trying to get votes on Roo...get people to vote it up. Urged RF to claim (which I do not understand the value of as who would believe a claim from someone they suspected was scum?) several times and then voted him regardless. Since RF has been gone ABR has been basically taking a back seat and making worthless posts (to stay involved?) and letting us know he is v/LA but will get things going once he returns. So at the moment he is right up there with PM for me.

Important part bolded. He flat-out says he does not think DN/Bob is scum.

If you were scum would you tell us? This is as useful to us as the claim you squeezed from RayFrost. And the fact DN got replaced has no bearing on his town or scum status. I would have thought mafia would be more likely to not quit a game but in my only other mafia game....both the mafia were replaced (not sure which point in the game but it was early). So mafia can ask for replacements as well as town.

Actually a point against Bob, arguing with ABR. Very slight townie points for this post.

1) They are similar to my interpretations. When TC made her case I thought she brought up some things worth looking more closely at. After further review I’m not convinced DN is scum. Suspicious…sure (as is everyone else IMO to some degree). Maybe if it was L-1 or 2 he wouldn’t have had the conviction to place his vote. Whereas voting when it's L-3 may have been about as committed as he appeared to towards OMG (and in hindsight…the game itself).

Again reiterating his “meh” attitude towards the DN/Bob case. Opting to stick with the fitz/Pablo/ABR side-debate.

… and that’s pretty much it from fitz regarding Bob. 2 posts saying he doesn’t believe in the case against Bob and 1 post arguing that scum could replace out (he was right). He could be easily be scum from this trying to gently prod the discussion away from his partner by dismissing the case, but I did gain a mildly town read from him during our argument. Still, from the reread he's neutral at best.

[Pablo Molinero]

Conclusion boils down to this (aimed at Paltry and anyone else who didn't read the quote-wall):

A) Both you and fitz lynched a townie (that DeathnoteSCUM also helped lynch).
B) Both you and fitz basically dismissed the case, neither pressured or voted, against DN/Bob until the cop claim came around.
C) PE is championing a weak case against me and obviously does not want to see the holes in it.

Point “A” speaks for itself.
Point “B” is as simple as a few quotes.

And PE goes from thinking this:

-] Mafia-rific [-
DeathNote/replacement: At this point, the strongest case against anyone has got to be DeathNote. The point that struck the hardest was the fact that he seems to follow the club without asking any questions. He votes when everyone else is, unvotes when others seem to. That is the scariest part. As I said, actions speak louder than words, and his actions are not pro-town.

To this after his scumpartner has time to recover/explain:

On Bob's defense:
So far, pretty sound on the points put forth.

@Bob: I think the major problem with your argument as of right now is that one post. It's still making you look suspicious in my eyes.

On the other hand, the volume of posts where DeathNote points towards NewbScum is a plus on your side. I'm watching you.

So, with points “A” and “B” In order, point “C” tips the scales for:

Vote: Paltry Excuse

Look at it from my point of view: If I am not lynched then the town is guaranteed a win. Period.

[Pablo Molinero]

T-c:

You are clean since you are confirmed. Your logic in that way is not sound. There have to be some townies on mislynches. Period.

But it helps and is MUCH more likely that some people on the wagon are scum. How long have you been playing Mafia (the game)? Are we in some magical game where scum does NOT lynch town?! This is not an elaborate conspiracy, this is a more simple game than some people give it credit for.

Also WHY is not commenting (being distracted my more immedeate people attacking me) more scummy than SAYING YOU DON'T THINK SCUM IS... SCUM! This is getting quite astounding, T-c. Think of it as simply as possible and you'll see that I am right. My points do not "fail" and quite frankly, I'm insulted that you think so.

...
Where the hell are fitz and Star, anyways?

Fitz is V/LA until 10/23.

[Pablo Molinero]

Your final statement is that if town never lynches you, town wins. What the crap? If the town never lynches you and you're scum, town loses. Both unconfirmed townies think at this point if they remain unlynched town will win. The goon thinks at this point if they remain unlynched they will win. Secondly, your original points against fitz seem to have no bearing on your opinions now.

If you look at it from my point of view: You're scum.

Don't try and spin this. I say "Look at it from my point of view" as in I know I'm town. Unlike other mafia games where you have to choose between people in LyLo and hope for the best, if I can secure PE and fitz lynches (in either order) in 2 days, we are guaranteed a town win.

The bold part concerns me, since if you were true town you'd have some degree of uncertianty and should be looking at

both

me and fitz, and try to secure those two running lynches.

[Pablo Molinero]

The whole game really hinges on Starbuck, I want to see what she has to say/think.

[Pablo Molinero]

A) I think not calling attention to/ignoring a case on a scumbuddy is scummier than saying that you outright disbelieve it...

B) Oh, and at what point did you start finding PE more scummy that fitz? Just curious~

A) But

why

? Do you have a reason or logic-process or are you just going by gut? I inherently disagree. If you can't explain it to me, can you really justify it to yourself?

B) Also, the split in my brain right now is 60% PE and 40% fitz. ABR was right in saying that both scum were likely riding the Day 1 wagon. I'm not alone in this mindset. What pushed PE over the top is the direct case against me and what I feel is an invalid point: calling me scum based on my interactions (or lack thereof) with Bob, when others outright tried to go AGAINST your case on the scum.

Back to the wagon point, let's just look at the theory without names attached:

You have three people as suspects. Two have been on a town-lynch and one has not. Scum's main priority is to get mislynches to win so they are more likely to be on the wagon. Shouldn't you lean towards lynching the people on the town-lynch as opposed to the person that abstained? This is as simple and basic as mafia theory comes. Occam's razor: it's the simplest solution.

My arguments boil down to these points and I'm standing by them, yes, because I'm hoping that it's just something wrong in my phrasing that's not clicking with you.

[Pablo Molinero]

I disagree with the fact that you disagree! ^_^ Gosh, I think it's stupid for scum to call any attention to their scumbuddy (whether they agree or not with the arguments put forth) so naturally that makes you scummy for me! @_@;

Also, can't believe you just tried to use Occam's razor. =_=

I don't think you're dense enough to really believe the stuff you're proposing, so I'd have to say I think you're scum! ^_^ I have a better opinion of you than that!

What a f**king terrible attitude. You've slapped me in the face and act as if you don't realize it. Hide behind those cutesy smiley-faces all you want. I'm town and yes I do believe in what I'm saying. You're condescending, dismissive, and oblivious all in one post. I'm pulling the IC card: I believe my argument because I have played many a game on this site and you start to see trends after a while. This is one of them.

...I'm done with you. I'm going to be asking around for opinions after this game is over just to see how wrong you are: your grasp of basic mafia theory is crap if you think lynching me over the others is a good idea based on the points I've put forward/argued.

FYI I have no intention of explaining anything unless asked by someone who is not Pablo~ I really don't think I need to! ^_^;

You don't think you have to explain yourself?!?! What kind of privileged attitude is that bullshit. Come up with some reasons and flow of logic instead of just going "nuh uh" and leaving it at that. You may be cleared as an innocent, but that still means you have to think critically at times. Someone call her on this. Starbuck? Fitz?

Gah, I can already see the inherently false calls of "scum-blowup" coming my way. I urge someone to do a meta on me: I get this passionate/pissed when I'm town.

[Pablo Molinero]

Bah, the "IC Card" should mean nothing, in all honesty. I was out of line with that one.

[Pablo Molinero]

My analysis is in work. I replaced into two games at the same time so it's kinda kicking me in the ass, but I will get the first part of my analysis up tonight for you guys. Apologies for the delay.

Hopefully "tonight" is sooner than later. Are both Paltry and fitz away or just lurking?

[Pablo Molinero]

Cool, let's keep this game moving.

[Pablo Molinero]

And, per usual, I argue that it's mostly a circumstantial playstyle thing and is a null-tell. In this game, I was quite distracted with what were more pressing matters, either real life or fitz/ABR.

Do you really think that you or fitz having a few one-off comments about DN/bob constitute anything stronger than me ignoring the situation. It's not like you were all gung-ho one way or the other. Your premise applies for all three of us in vary magnitudes. I would maybe concede your point only if you admit that you and fitz, on this specific point, don't look too much better. I think the whole thing is a wash and vote-analysis wins out again.

Now if you excuse me, I have to go find some of my more town-epic blowups (what you linked to was a mildly annoyed, staged argment with my scumbuddy, not a blowup) to appease T-c.

[Pablo Molinero]

Bah, I have been poked. Catching up.

[Pablo Molinero]

Well, that vote from fitz is not at all surprising. Right after a big ol' analysis against him, a vote is dropped and he goes from cautious to self-preservation mode.

Well, my hand has been sort of forced here. Thank you, Starbuck for reminding me of my old cases against fitz. My mind has changed a little reading that, and I think it's still about 60/40, but in favor of fitz, (due the attack on me on Day 3), since he has plenty of history against him. I can't get past his little, "I agree with Bob on his DeathNote defense," and that's IT about that subject. That's how scum sweeps things under the rug (I is a broken record, but that's what I believe).

At the risk of NK analysis (don't know why this hasn't been mentioned yet). ABR died in the night and it just so happened that he was the experienced player that was going head-to-head with fitz near the end of Day 2. He may have been bumped off since scum knew he would hound him the next day.

Unvote, Vote: havingfitz

T-c, it’s up to you now. Please read everything, see the timing, the arguments, and think critically.

[Pablo Molinero]

RE: My last line:

Or Paltry now, for that matter, he got that post in as I was composing mine.

[Pablo Molinero]

Well, that vote from fitz is not at all surprising. Right after a big ol' analysis against him, a vote is dropped and he goes from cautious to self-preservation mode.

Well, my hand has been sort of forced here. Thank you, Starbuck for reminding me of my old cases against fitz. My mind has changed a little reading that, and I think it's still about 60/40, but in favor of fitz, (due the attack on me on Day 3), since he has plenty of history against him. I can't get past his little, "I agree with Bob on his DeathNote defense," and that's IT about that subject. That's how scum sweeps things under the rug (I is a broken record, but that's what I believe).

At the risk of NK analysis (don't know why this hasn't been mentioned yet). ABR died in the night and it just so happened that he was the experienced player that was going head-to-head with fitz near the end of Day 2. He may have been bumped off since scum knew he would hound him the next day.

Unvote, Vote: havingfitz

T-c, it’s up to you now. Please read everything, see the timing, the arguments, and think critically.

I'm still formulating response to Starbuck's extrememely long analysis.

In the meantime:

So she reminded you of the weak case you called 'uncle' on? Who is switching BWs to save their butt? I have maintained suspicions of you since day one. My vote should come as no surprise. The timeliness of it was to ensure you had two votes before I did (as I expected you to flip to me). And just because I had an opinion on ABR and it was wrong...I don't think anyone would deny his posting was erratic and offensive. Even Starbucks comments on it. Re: my exchanges with ABR, people are wrong...just like ABR was when he assessed Almightly Bob as being townish (along with Pablo I might add).

Ahahaahhaha. You admit the case was weak? And I cried "uncle"? Lulz. I read your arguing STYLE as slightly more townie in a few posts on Day 2. As such, I wanted to back off before it spiraled out of control and a tunneling situation happened. Never did I concede any of your damn points, so don't go acting as if you "won" that exchange earlier. Mostly irrelevant, but it's a point of personal pride that you didn't "beat" anyone.

This sounds like I'm trying to sweet-talk Paltry, but nevertheless his unvote shows a very townie side of him. Instead of sitting back, riding his vote on me, and letting you or me get lynched by T-c, he's given second thought to getting the right lynch in 1 try instead of 2, which I appreciate.

[Pablo Molinero]

I can only take it one case at a time (between you and fitz) and there was a very pressing need/desire to defend myself. I admit, I didn't play it quite right and didn't remain neutral in my reaction when placing my first Day 3 vote, but it's hard to so when someone throws down a several big paragraphs against you. Now that I've cooled down a little and Starbuck has quoted my best points, I'm feeling a bit better about it. First reaction (hopefully) is the right one: fitz.

[Pablo Molinero]

If it's not one person, its another that has to catch up. Just do it before the 8th, plz.

[Pablo Molinero]

:arrow: Going back to the D2 fitz vs Pablo... maybe it's just me, but why is hypocrisy a scumtell? o_O;; I don't get it. havingfitz made a pretty bad case against Pablo,

but you don't lynch people for making bad cases, especially not in newbie games. =_=;

Admittedly I paid the exchange less attention than I should have since I had a guilty on DeathNote and was planning to claim.

Actually, that's a reliable scumtell pretty much everywhere on site.

Scum must try to lynch town. Scum have to make cases against townies in where they (the scum) know their basic premise (lynching scum) is inheriently false. This breeds cases based on falsehoods and reaching logic and these are identified as "bad" cases. Therefore these cases are more likely used by scum.

Now, yes, there are times when scum can use legit cases against people who unwittingly commit scumtells and there are also times when townies just don't "get it" and use bad cases because they're trying too hard, but

as a whole

the probability of someone using a bad case is more likely to be scum.

You follow?

[Pablo Molinero]

:arrow: I'm giving a lot of thought to Pablo's "IC card" moment. Pulling the IC card in a newbie game isn't very nice anyway, but it's less mean if you're town and telling the truth than if you're scum and lying about it! ^_^ So I thought it was a pretty townie thing to do, but then he backpedalled when I pointed it out. ._.; I was tempted to just say "everyone let's just trust the IC because he said so, and lynch everyone but him!" Then it's either a win or a very funny loss! ^_^

The "IC Card" is a direct IC Ethics violation (Thanks, VRK) of me trying to leverage my position of power to influence the game. Thus, I immedeately retracted the statement as I should have.

[Pablo Molinero]

They are less reliable in Newbie games, yes, but still have to be considered, don't you think? Fitz also has more than 1 game to his name.

[Pablo Molinero]

PABLO’S ANGRY META (if you don't care about my "blow up situation" don't bother with this post):


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

One of my first games; basically all of day 2 of this game where I spend time making long posts and banging my head against the wall, increasingly frustrated in tone:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=


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


In this one, a lot of the later Days I (as town) was accused for inactivity and had to turn things around or the town would lose. I did so, getting passionate in the process, and town won with me in endgame.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=

Man, I'm tied to BB/Zach by Vi, Spring/Zach by BB, and Spring/BB by Zach as a buddy. Anyone see something wrong with this? In my experience, people agreeing is never, ever a good thing. Either epic bussing is happening (very unlikely at presumed LyLo), or ya'll are wrong. Think about it.

----

Well, for one, I've been moving from Dayton to Columbus to Cincinnati in the past week. (Like, moving, moving, not just driving to and from). Would it be better if I just popped in with a "sorry busy week, lol" and went away? As for when I'm not moving about the state, "Hiding" isn't really an apt word for my behavior, methinks, more frustration and apathy with all the fukkin' replacements and never really getting "into" the game, so I never established any momentum.

(Thanks for your 562, Vi, so I know who the hell is who and who was on the wagons)

As for your other question Setael question about Zach, I'm finding him scummy from both Vi's (high protown player sofar) arguments and his recent "I'd like a lynch, even if it's me" noble-bullshit attitude WHEN WE'RE AT LYLO. No logical town would say that seriously, so I'm highly suspecting that it's just an act.

Vote: zachrulez

Beyond's recent behavior does nothing to inspire confidence (how the hell am I potential buddies to these two, Vi??) in that Zach expresses his desire for a Pablo or BB lynch and BB is quite quickly on the Pablo train. Cause and effect.

Dear lord. As much as it pains me to admit it, I agree with Setael in this whole exchange, and looker's reactions are just *so* ridiculous and strained, I can't help but to think our scum in panicing. I know the difference between "stupid" and STUPID (I have played with Empking and millar and zwet before), and this is falling in the former category. It ain't sitting right with me. Find something legit. Defend yourself.

vote: looker

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


This is probably the best one. I (as town) was getting hounded by a weak, weak, case that no one could explain and ended up lynched anyways after I curse up a storm. Town used that as a springboard to win, though.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=

This is 99 kinds of stupid. No one has given me a legit reason why I should be even a remotely decent lynch, just "Kinda linked to Vic" by Exalt, "Kinda linked to Exalt(?!?)" by Onion, and... well, nothing really by Blood other than "other people looking less scummy", so it just must be OMGUS. Don't let him get away with another weak bandwagon vote. You still have not given me a legit reason about my lynch. Do you think we are likely to find scum in me?

Kmd, you seem content to sit back and watch your creation take off, give me a reason other then Illustrated was kinda scummy eons ago. Contribute, plz. You "say" that you find Scigatt most scummy, and yet you're not bothering to pursue it. Because, hey, a mislynch is a mislynch, right?

We got several days left, so no one rush to hammer. There are still enough votes on the board between Vic, Scigatt, and Onion to swing a different lynch and maybe enough time for Exalt to come around (still holding out hope). You know, one that makes sense. I have not been inconsistent in my play, I have not made any massive gaffes or lies, I have not made an OMGUS vote, and I have not jumped from bandwagon to bandwagon.

Are you f**king blind? This is an out-and-out lie of my motives. I want to catch scum and Blood has the highest probability turning up that way. Also, it gives us information and helps CLEAR you more than harm you if he somehow flips town. I am more worried about a Blood/Kmd pair than I am of you/Blood. Get over yourself, this whole game does not revolve around you.

Hey idiot.

…And then he posted on Sunday saying he got back and needed the sleeps. Then he posted part 1 today and will post tomorrow. If he doesn't then and only then do you have a legitimate claim.

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


One more! Most recent game (again, I was town, won in endgame):

On the other hand, you have to see it from my point of view: I see someone do one of the most scummy things IMO, and if I let them off the hook easily and you end up being scum, I would have to throw myself out of a damn window from the embarrassment. You're trending in the right direction, though, so there may be hope for you yet.

I see I’ve taken two FoS’s from Kirby and adam, and yet no vote. Isn’t that quaint. Kirby, your breakdown of my posts on 242 is laughable. You show that I had a weak reason to vote adam (for emoticons), and then can’t figure it out when I FoS Katy for agreeing with me on the weak reason (or so I thought at the time, Katy has since recanted and I remain mildly suspicious of her). What, does 2+2=fish in your world? Scumhunting, I was doing it.

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


So, yeah, some meta analysis and links if you’re all interested in checking them. I'm kind of a jerk at times and this game was a pretty classic case of me getting frustrated with someone and a-sploding.

Also: Aside from the guaranteed win from surviving in this game, the “I have to survive” posts that make you so wary, T-c, (and rightfully so, from your position) amounts to me being very prideful in controlling my own destiny and keeping my endgame Win/Loss stats up. I don't like trusting others with my fate.

[Pablo Molinero]

That game in which I was scum was anger due to lack of activity in the game. Go back and look at the total length of that game. Awful. This game's frustration has come out of being voted for via weak cases and others misunderstanding my cases, which falls right into my Meta.

[Pablo Molinero]

2. You seem very aware of your meta. Whether it was played to your advantage, or it was a genuine reaction,

will be determined by your flip

.

I don't like this statement. It already assumes I will be lynched and in doing so subtlety pushes the town in that direction.

[Pablo Molinero]

Agreed that the Meta is null and most likely playstyle. I simply posted it in response to T-c pulling out one of my scum-games to try and make it a point against me when it isn't.

[Pablo Molinero]

2. You seem very aware of your meta. Whether it was played to your advantage, or it was a genuine reaction,

will be determined by your flip

.

I don't like this statement. It already assumes I will be lynched and in doing so subtlety pushes the town in that direction.

That's not what I meant at all. I thought flip just meant when your role is revealed.

I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong, Star) that "flip" is understood to be someone’s reveal after they've been lynched unless you specifically say "at endgame".

[Pablo Molinero]

Damn same-time posts. That's happened like 4 times to me in this game.

[Pablo Molinero]

I think that second quote (the first time I mentioned Meta) was me trying to preemptively head off any comment of "scum getting frustrated" because I have seen

a lot

of times passion mistaken for scuminess in newbie games.

[Pablo Molinero]

My case against PE was mostly reactionary and defensive to someone who just launched an all-out assault on me. Of course my first reaction is to think they're scummy.

[Pablo Molinero]

That, and using that awful "didn't comment on Bob/DN" case, yes.

[Pablo Molinero]

.... Nope, you guys are going into LyLo. Good luck, Starbuck.

T-c, we'll be having words after the game.

[Pablo Molinero]

Why would the fact that I'm in the Navy (and have been for the past 6 years) have anything to do with an online forum game?

You really do have a hard time answering questions from me...don't you Starbuck. As evidenced by a question for an answer and the several outstanding questions I have towards you. If you don't want to give me your interpretation of a game rule just say so. Like I said...I was just curious why your military affiliation was something that needed mentioned in the game and if you

(or VRK for that matter)

thought it was allowed within the game.

...No really, why the hell should it matter?

[Pablo Molinero]

Aw. Dammit.

I honestly wasn't sure who was the scum in the end. On one side, there was the "I don't think DN/Bob is scum" of havingfitz and on the other side we have the fence-sitting, never-quite-committal PE going after me guns-a-blazin' on Day 3. I should have hammered more on your personality/playstyle flip on Day 3 but you sent me into survival-mode. Great call bringing fitz with you to endgame, PE, you manipulated him and T-c all the way.

More later, I gotta jet for now.

[Pablo Molinero]

Yeah, I'm waiting to T-c to show up and post thoughts. I'm still astounded 2/3 townies thought I was the good lynch for Day 3.

T-c, when you show up, where/when did you play mafia before mafiascum.net? It seems that your ideas of scum-tells are far different than what I come to think is the norm.

VRK - Did I have any ground to stand on when bringing up the Day 1 townie-lynch (which fitz/PE both were both a part of and I was not)?

(Currently doing NaNoWriMo, so I'm having less time than expected. Hopefully more later.)