Mafia 102: No-Frills Game Thread(Town wins!)

[bigmc109]

/confirm

[bigmc109]

Eh, I'm not so sure if the No Lynch idea is that bad. We only lose one person per Day/Night cycle with it, and it gives us time to gather information. If we gave it 2 or 3 cycles it wouldn't be that much different than a basic Mini Normal set-up, the difference being we start out with some information. I think with three cycles the cop would have enough time to figure out his sanity, and hopefully we'd be able to narrow it down a lot on Day 4.

On the other hand, I do see the problem with the Cop being killed and possibly random, but I still think it's a strategy to consider.

Also, if the Jailkeeper can't block Mafia NK's, what kills are they protecting people from?

[bigmc109]

This is just as much for me as it is for everyone else, but I just want to work out the no lynch strategy logically.

The odds of us lynching scum on Day 1 are very poor (18.75%). Night 1, the Mafia will almost certainly kill a townie (odds of a successful protection are less than 1%, so for the purposes of this, I'll say the Mafia is definetely killing a townie). If we choose to lynch D1, there is an 81.25% chance of losing 2 townies; if we no lynch, there's a 100% chance of losing 1 townie. I think the trade-off is worth the information.

Now, I agree with crypto in saying that we SHOULD NOT go gung ho into a no lynch right away. We have to play this as a normal Day 1 until the deadline is getting close. If no one really jumps out as suspicious enough to lynch, we should go for the no lynch. We should only lynch if 9 of us are LEGITIMATELY SURE that someone is scum.

I think that in some D1's, maybe a third of the players are really set on one person as scum, and the other fifth or so that are part of the majority just agree because it "looks good". In this game, it's really in our best interest to not lynch unless more than half of us are really, really sure.

As for Day 2, assuming we use this strategy Day 1, the odds of lynching a scum don't get much better (20%). I think it would again be in our best interest to not lynch unless the day of disscussion makes 8 of us think someone is definetely scum.

I'm not saying we should have no discussion and just quickly no lynch on the first 2 days. I'm saying we should run them to the deadline, and if no one is obvious scum, we should no lynch then so we can get some information without risking too much loss. A 100% chance of losing 2 townies is SO MUCH BETTER than a 4% chance of lynching two scum and still losing 2 townies, even if it does 100% leave 2 scum alive.

[bigmc109]

The odds of us lynching scum on Day 1 are very poor (18.75%). Night 1, the Mafia will almost certainly kill a townie (odds of a successful protection are less than 1%, so for the purposes of this, I'll say the Mafia is definetely killing a townie). If we choose to lynch D1, there is an 81.25% chance of losing 2 townies; if we no lynch, there's a 100% chance of losing 1 townie. I think the trade-off is worth the information.

Fine look at it this way, We have a 18.75% chance of lynching scum day 1, while 0% chance of killing scum in the night. I choose the lynch. However you can bring up the no lynch when we are ready to lynch. Until than, scum hunt, and don't talk about theory yet. If everybody expects a no lynch, than this day will be shot.

Fair enough.

[bigmc109]

Think about it. Sixteen players, thirteen of which are town. That's 81.25%. Unless my math's off (not my forte, honestly), mafia's quickest route to victory is five consecutive days with mis-lynches coupled with five consecutive nights with successful kills, at which point three goons endgame three townies. That's one tall feat, and even then it's worst case scenario for the town—it'd require a massive meltdown, months of utterly demented scum hunting.

And it's even tougher when you factor in no-lynches, which would, what, double the number of days it'd take?

I agree with this. Why would I want to vote No Lynch in the first place? All it's going to do is prolong the game. Why not place some pressure on people, and see what we can get of them? Voting No Lynch and watching the scum kill one every night would be amazingly boring and slow, and wouldn't give us much to figure out who they are.

....I think the point was that we do both.

[bigmc109]

@ SerialClergyman: I didn't say that we should definetely 100% no lynch, I said that if 9 of us truly don't believe someone is guilty we should no lynch.

Also, I've reread EC's last post about 5 times and I have no idea what you mean. Care to elaborate?

[bigmc109]

(again, @ SC): OK, hiphop's link helped me see where you were going with your vote, but I'm weary of voting the newbie a few days into the game based on some stupid/contradictory stuff he said (crypto knows what I'm talkin about....)

[bigmc109]

SC, my main problem is with your point #2. Where did he say or imply that no lynch would be harder for scum?

[bigmc109]

There would be conversation because we're only voting no lynch if no one jumps out as particularly scummy. Also, I think that more relaxed scum will slip up much easier.

[bigmc109]

So really it doesn't matter what we do, scum will slip up either way.

As a means of hopefully getting off this topic, I guess I should start scumhunting. So far SC and HH are giving me slightly scummy vibes, while EC is giving me a newbie vibe. Sc really jumped on something that just doesn't seem that suspicious, and HH followed right along. Of course, this just might be my past experiences talking, I'm definetely not ready to vote yet.

[bigmc109]

Over 3 days, it should be pretty easy for the cop to figure out his alignment. 3 guilties will mean paranoid, 3 innocents will mean.....I forget the name, and a combination will mean either sane or insane. Then after we actually start lynching, the cop will be able to figure it out in time to help us lynch scum.

If we lynch, we will lose so many more townies than we have to. The odds of hitting scum on D1 or D2 are awful.

[bigmc109]

No matter what he is, the combination of mislynches AND night kills will put us in an even tighter spot. We have a 33% chance of lynching scum on D1 OR D2. That means that on

D3

, there is a 67% chance that 4 townies will be dead. With the no lynching plan, we will have only 3 townies dead on

D4

.

[bigmc109]

My point is that with lynching we are

almost

guarenteed to have 0 scum dead, and 100% guarenteed to have more townies dead than we could with POTENTIALLY no lynching.

[bigmc109]

OK, we need to not talk about no lynching anymore. We were just starting to scum hunt when charter brought it up again. If it happens, there's no need to talk about it until the deadline is closer.

For the record, I think hiphop is the scummiest at this point. At least SC gave some original reasoning; HH just followed along.

[bigmc109]

EBWOP: No lynching is especially a stupid idea this early in the day, since scum can just sit back while all the pressure is lifted from them, because everyone just no lynches. Everyone who jumped on the no lynch train is suspicious. Short days hurt the town, so even if by some miraculous means you can justify no lynching, at least do it after we have discussed/pressured others for a while -- at least then we get something out of it.

You obviously didn't pay attention to the no lynching proposal, since you basically just agreed with it....

[bigmc109]

OK, very quick PBPA.

Sando - nothing much to say yet, but seems like he's level-headed enough.
hiphop - either a very superior townie or a "how could not see that I'm town!?" scum.
le Chat - not much to say, though I do agree with his suspicions of staple.
CSL - nothing yet.
X_~ - I think we can chalk up his first few posts to just "being new".
muh316 - nothing yet; I'd like to see some thoughts from him on other players.
Staple - his first few posts seem very scummy to me, but it could just be that he was frazzled after jumping in at page 7.
Team Aether - nothing yet.
Kaiveran - Seems to post thoughtfully, but not enough content yet for a good opinion.
EtherealCookie - I think people are mistaking newbieness with scumminess here. Can you post some thoughts on other players, at least your top suspects?
mask man - I generally agree with him, but not much to say. That sig makes your posts look A LOT longer than they really are.
SerialClergyman - His reasoning on EC is a little too thin, I wish we'd list some more suspects.
charter - seems anti-bigmc, but pro-town nonetheless.
crypto - If he's scum, he's gonna live for a loooooong time.
Pomegranate - nothing yet.

[bigmc109]

I question why anyone but mods would log in as unhidden.

I think crypto's attacks look pretty legit - I think you should address them instead of counter-BSing. The man simply will not stop til you answer him.

[bigmc109]

So that the whole "he's online but not posting" argument goes out the window? It was a general statement. I often come to this site, stay on for awhile, and leave without ever going past the main forums page.

So, how bout those links? I think the definition of a bandwagon is "looks good, I agree VOTE".

[bigmc109]

hiphop, I have been scumhunting, it just so happens that my suspicions fall on you.

Though I have to admit if X keeps it up at his rate, he will definetely be scummier.

[bigmc109]

SC really needs to post soon....is it too soon for a prod? I think it's been 47 hours, plus he's active on the site.

[bigmc109]

That's a horrible excuse. You shouldn't be in more games than you can actively participate in. Replace out or post more frequently.

[bigmc109]

hiphop, talk about something other than SC's absense. I know I did it too, but not for 5 posts. I'm liking charter's post on you. I don't think any of us found SC's absense scummy, just annoying....are you trying to make it seem scummy?

[bigmc109]

unvote, vote Pom

Um....where did that come from? Maybe I'm just tired, but I'm missing the reasoning on voting Pom.

[bigmc109]

Sigh guys I feel really bad about not being able to contribute. I am usually incredibly active and the other game to which I am committed is also seeing less of me. I just have a crapload of work which was piled on me recently,

I do not really know exactly what you guys want from me

, so if you want to ask me anything regarding a specific topic please do so. I went through the thread just now.

Since I was not active at all the first 11 pages I do not think I can give a decent summary of all the players. Please ask me some questions so I can prove to you that I am in fact a townie.

I promise I WILL find some way to keep up with this game from here on in.

What we want is scum hunting that doesn't consist of:

Anyone who supported no lynching seems suspicious to me

or:

Everyone who jumped on the no lynch train is suspicious.

Way to completely generalize an entire group of people. I have to say, I missed it before, but this combination of quotes is very scummy.

1. Attacking an entire group based on one action and not naming anyone specific or anything other than the fact that they were on the no lynch bandwagon.
2. Obviously what any pro-town player would want (from you or anyone) is scumhunting; the fact that this isn't obvious seems suspicious.
3. You have only 2 votes on you, why are you already preaching to us that you're a townie?
4. Your activity level has has nothing to do with your scumhunting/player analysis ability. In fact, I'd think a less active person would be able to come in with an unbiased view that would help the town more. Or at least an unbiased townie would....

[bigmc109]

I don't usually vote for someone unless I fully back their lynch. At this point, I don't back anyone's lynch. I will say that, in case I didn't make it clear, I find staple to be more suspicious than hiphop was (and thus my top suspect). But I want to hear a lot more before voting, or at least let a lot more time pass.

[bigmc109]

I guess you guys are correct in lynching me, since I know I've been playing scummy. I will probably only cause more confusion throughout the game because of my scummy behavior these first few pages. You guys also do not lose much by lynching since I have not been contributing at all. Think the only way I could defend myself at this moment is to say that I will be more active from here on in, and I am a townie so it does not benefit the town to lynch me.

Vote: Staple

[bigmc109]

I think that quote speaks for itself. He's either a scum that cracked REALLY easily (99%) or a townie who obviously won't be of any help (1%). No lynching would be stupid with scum this obvious.

[bigmc109]

3. You have only 2 votes on you, why are you already preaching to us that you're a townie?

Because its not good for the town to lynch a townie? Do you suggest I claim cop instead?

Notice how Staple didn't call bigmc out on the 'townie', I'll check in a moment but I'm pretty damn sure that Staple wasn't an idiot and said that he was a townie. Nonetheless what Staple did say makes me want to puke.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

[bigmc109]

Well, to clear that up, he was stupid enough. Check #266.

[bigmc109]

Crypto, I feel you are a bit erratic and all over the place. You seem to be a bit paranoid. Everything I have said is true. How is it an appeal to emotion when I say exactly what is true. Is it a lie when I say that I am a good vote because I have not been contributing and I have come across as scummy?

....OK let's do it then. Does anyone have any reasons that they aren't voting Staple besides an early bandwagon?

[bigmc109]

Sorry for not posting, I was unexpectadley V/LA since Friday night.

Here is my rationale behind voting Staple. There are two possibilities; he's either town or scum. It is also fairly clear that he doesn't want to play anymore based on his posts. I feel that if he were town and didn't want to play anymore, he would just replace out. But he could be scum acting like he doesn't want to play anymore, saying he's town and whatnot, trying to AtE and test us (by saying "go ahead lynch me). He is a brand new player, and I'd think AtE and "lynch me so I can prove I'm town" would be a very appealing strategies for newbie scum. Yes, muh is looking pretty bad, and if Staple flips town, I'll definetely be voting muh tomorrow. But because of what I just said, I'm really liking my Staple vote right now. If he were a townie acting this way, he would just replace out.

And fine I'll admit it....no lynch was a bad idea, you win charter.

[bigmc109]

You made a very good argument for own lynch. Yes, what I put in quotation marks is exaggeration. There's a difference between putting something in quotation marks and in quote tags; putting it in quotation marks is meant to emphasize certain points you want to shine through, while quote tags are meant to be exact quotes.

I never said that

you said

you didn't want to play anymore, I said it was fairly clear from your posts that you didn't.

Your argument for your lynch is that you're inactive, have been playing scummy, and drag the town down. Your argument against it is "I'm town". You're not preaching the opposite, you're making a footnote about the opposite. I will admit, "lynch me so I can prove I'm town" has a different ring than I intended, but it was meant to emphasize the fact that your arguments against your own lynch are so small that they're insignifigant.

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

Super Accurate* Vote Count(as of post 400):

RayFrost - 2(mask man, crypto)
Staple - 5(le Chat, hiphop, bigmc109, muh316, Pomegranate)
crypto - 1(X_~)
X_~ - 1(EtherealCookie)
Pomegranate - 1(SerialClergyman)
muh316 - 3(Empking, Sando, charter)
bigmc109 - 1(Staple)

Not Voting:Kaiveran, RayFrost

*Not guaranteed to be accurate.

[bigmc109]

Sorry for not posting, I was unexpectadley V/LA since Friday night.

Here is my rationale behind voting Staple. There are two possibilities; he's either town or scum. It is also fairly clear that he doesn't want to play anymore based on his posts. I feel that if he were town and didn't want to play anymore, he would just replace out. But he could be scum acting like he doesn't want to play anymore, saying he's town and whatnot, trying to AtE and test us (by saying "go ahead lynch me). He is a brand new player, and I'd think AtE and "lynch me so I can prove I'm town" would be a very appealing strategies for newbie scum.

Yes, muh is looking pretty bad, and if Staple flips town, I'll definetely be voting muh tomorrow.

But because of what I just said, I'm really liking my Staple vote right now. If he were a townie acting this way, he would just replace out.

And fine I'll admit it....no lynch was a bad idea, you win charter.

This is making me question muh now. Now I'm wanting to vote you.

Lynching someone because they don't want to play, because they could be either town or scum, using ATE, or being brand new is a terrible idea. That was all the reasons you just listed there, not a one of them makes him more likely to be scum than town. None of them are good reasons for anything more than a pressure wagon, but you seem pretty intent on lynching him (then when he obvflipstown, muh).

I believe I will vote you.

unvote, vote bigmc

ALL of them are good reasons when taken in combination. Add to that the OMGUS vote on me, and I see a strategy/playstyle much more likely to be used by scum than town. btw, when I said he could be scum or town, I think it was pretty clear that I didn't mean it was a 50/50 chance. I think he's scum.

[bigmc109]

Why is lynching someone because they don't want to play a bad idea? Because if he was a townie who truly didn't want to play, he'd replace out. If he's scum using that as a strategy, which he probably is because he has not replaced out, he'd stay in and tell us to lynch him using reverse psychology (if I tell them to lynch me, they won't). You can't honestly tell me that the two posts I pointed out aren't scummy.

When I said he could be either town or scum, I was trying to get across the 2nd sentence of this post.

Using AtE is suspicious because it means he has no other arguments besides "I'm town guysssss." Notice how he completely stopped suspecting X_~ (actively, at least) and started suspecting me as soon as I got into this with him. That's OMGUS if I've ever seen it.

As far as being new goes, I can't really defend that point anymore since he said (keyword, said) he isn't new. I originally meant a newbie scum would be prone to use AtE and reverse psychology.

[bigmc109]

Staple Post-by-Post Analysis

0-1: Confirming posts.
2: Attacks X for being unhelpful, but admits he has been too. Says that everything is already resolved everytime he logs in. Says anyone who supports no lynch is suspicious.
3: Makes a valid argument against no lynching.
4: Quotes le_chat and corrects his accusation, points out that le_chat did the exact same thing he (falsely) accused staple of doing.
5: Displays a poor understanding of the RVS.
6-7: Talking about how he'll post thoughts soon.
8: Says he is unable to post thoughts, and goes on an "I'm town, I'm town"-type panic attack despite having only 2 votes on him.
9: Says that he guesses we're correct in lynching him, and that he's dragging the game down because of his inactivity and scumminess. Says we don't lose much by lynching him, then does a COMPLETE 180° and says we shouldn't lynch him because he's town. Then attacks mask_man for basically the same things he just accused himself of (minus the inactive part).
10: Says crypto seems paranoid, and says everything he says is true. This includes both him saying he's a townie AND saying that he's a good vote.
11: Says he's a vanilla (I think), then he says he must be the worst scum ever. No, I'm not using that last part as a reason.
12: Says I misquoted him and OMGUS-votes me.
13: Claims he isn't new to Mafia, just this site. Then says he wouldn't find a replacement if he didn't want to play, but says that doesn't matter because he does.

I will admit Staple's first few posts don't come across as very scummy (I know I said in my PBPA before they did, but I think I was a little OMGUS-y from the no lynch thing), but ever since that they've had scum written all over them. How the hell do you not find him scummy? Defend your position with more than "the bandwagon seems scum-driven".

[bigmc109]

None of that is any more than weak suspicion on your part. I suppose you can keep clinging to a staple vote, but that's not convincing at all. Staple wagon is pointless.

Everything since his 8th post has reeked of scumminess.

[bigmc109]

....he's also right. He has been playing scummy. How is that an awful reason to vote someone?

[bigmc109]

I refuse to consider he's town until he stops "screwing up". He has yet to do ANYTHING to defend himself well. You, on the other hand, seem to do nothing but defend for him.

[bigmc109]

@ Staple: I wouldn't say I'm not giving you a chance. Every new post of yours is another chance. If you want to change my mind, improve your play.

[bigmc109]

I have to say, I'm pretty amazed at the amount of people who are letting Staple's play go. I can see how the Staple wagon seems oppurtunistic; he's really the first to appear overtly scummy, and if he is town, I wouldn't be surprised if scum are jumping on it right now. But the point is that just because some people aren't providing the most unique analysis for their votes does NOT mean Staple's scumminess goes away. The fact of tha matter is that Staple's scumminess doesn't extend very far beyond what I've already accused him of. Ever since his vote on me, he's been pretty much coasting, with charter doing most of his talking for him, which means everyone who subsequently voted for him doesn't have any new insights. Of course their reasons are going to be the same if

Staple doesn't bring anything new to the table

Staple has pretty much been pushed into the background even when the discussion is about him. I'm pretty sure he could go without posting for awhile simply because the heat has shifted to the people on his wagon. I doubt any of the people voting me right now can honestly say that Staple's play has made him look town. Are you guys even somewhat suspicious of him?

Now, having said all that, he has added one thing since his vote, which was a short paragraph on charter. I'm finding it pretty interesting upon re-reading it, and it's almost making me start to rethink this whole thing. There are two things that paragraph says to me. Either:

1. Staple and charter are scumbuddies, and Staple is getting nervous about charter's defense of him, and is now trying to distance himself; or
2. charter-scum is trying to defend Staple-town in order to appear clean if Staple flips town.

Don't take this as me discounting the possibility of charter being town; those were the two things the quote said to me, not the two possibilities for this game. It could very well be Staple-scum trying to shift attention onto charter. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's what it is. But it is interesting nonetheless.

For the record, I don't think defending someone is a scumtell by itself. I think if you really believe something, you shuold express it. This is why I'm still finding charter to be town.

[bigmc109]

Is that really what all this is about? If by "setting up a lynch" you mean "giving my D2 thoughts if Staple flips town", then you're right. I'll admit that "I'll be voting muh" might be

slightlly

strong language, but you're definitely blowing it way out of proportion. If Staple flips town, I'm not running at muh with a noose, but I will be asking him a few questions. My first post on day 2 will not be voting muh.

@Empking: I'm not understanding your question. Can you rephrase it?

[bigmc109]

I'm using the same reason as everyone else to attack muh, the difference is I preceded it with "if Staple flips town". Why? Because Staple is the person muh is blatantly bandwagonning on!

[bigmc109]

I'd like to give Staple's replacement a chance to speak before anything else. I'm weary of lynching people who just entered the game based on their predecessors behaivor

Unvote: Staple

@Empking: I think it's because muh was doing a lot of lurking and suddenly jumped back into the game with a vote on Staple very soon after I first accused/voted him, before fading off into the background again. Looking back, I'm actually surprised that some people found my vote more oppurtunistic than his.

[bigmc109]

I agree that he was the scummiest, but I still want to give WW a good chance to defend himself. Not to mention catch up to this page.

[bigmc109]

Yeah what gives mask man just because the forums haven't moved isn't a reason not to post.

crypto, is that Brad Pitt from Se7en?

[bigmc109]

My internet has been down since this morning; I stopped by the library so I could post this.

Now, to SC, I think you're really misrepresenting me with your argument. Yes, I thought Staple was scum, and until WW has finished reading, I continue to believe it. The fact of the matter is that Staple could have signifigantly changed my opinion of him if his play had improved; it did not improve one bit. Was I pushing for his lynch? Yes, that's what players do in this game when they believe someone is scum. It's also what scum do when they are trying to cause a mislynch; the fact that I pushed for Staple's lynch is a null tell. Notice my unvote of him. This was in part because he was replaced, and also in part because he went against one of my arguments about him (that being he finally asked for a replacement). I was not going for the easy target, I was going for the scummy player.

I'll hopefully have a full PBPA up tomorrow night; today being my birthday and tomorrow being a field trip I won't be on a computer until then.

[bigmc109]

I think mask man put it best; everyone seems to be ignoring my perfectly legitimate case against Staple just because he seemed like the "obvious target" and I

mentioned

that muh might be scum if staple flips town. Holy hell, that was not me setting up two lynches, that was me making a small comment in regards to muh's bandwagoning. I DID NOT say that muh was 100% confirmed scum, I said that he was more likely to be scum if Staple flipped town. Think about it conversely; if Staple flips scum is anyone really going to be suspecting muh tomorrow after bandwagoning him so early on? My guess is no. And as far as the VI argument goes....yes, he was a VI. But as (I believe) crypto stated, he much less of a VI than GreenDude from my meta was. Being the village idiot does not mean he isn't scum, especially when he's not that much of an idiot.

As far as SerialClergyman goes, I'm flabbergasted at how gung-ho he is to lynch me. I've never seen this many "lynch! lynch! lynch yay lynch!" posts, and while I haven't played in many games, I've read quite a few. I don't think it's particularly scummy, but it is bad town play.

crypto, it seems like your vote on me is more of an information oriented thing than a sign you want to lynch. It seems like you're interested in learning more about other players than me though. If you are looking for info from me, I'm not sure what more there is to give. I gave my reasons for everything several times, and I'm not sure what more you guys want from me (that is, the guys who aren't completely set on seeing me hang).

I'm also not liking malpascp's vote on me. I'm sure he'll give the same reasons as everyone else, but care to elaborate?

[bigmc109]

I'd like to note that the pace and style of my newbie game was much different than that in this game. No one really jumped out as much as Staple did here, so of course I wasn't as aggressive. By the time someone did jump out, everyone seemed to agree, so of course I wasn't as aggressive. Everyone agreed with me.

[bigmc109]

Because the case on me is horrible and the majority of the players can see that. If I didn't include that one little fragment which you said was setting up muh for a lynch, I doubt there would be a case. What I have I done since then that is scummy?

[bigmc109]

@ muh: I'm not so sure SC is scum. I know he's been pushing big for my lynch, and his reasoning has been reduced to "this wagon is so yummy", but crypto's been doing the exact same thing (if a bit more subtley) to Pom.

Even if I'm a little suspicious of SC, the crypto factor has me thinking it's just OMGUS. At this point, the two people I'd put my vote on are muh or Pom. But I really don't want to vote until I hear something of substance from WarWound.

[bigmc109]

Yea, I clearly haven't been scumhunting all game. What game are you reading? There's a reason a bigmc wagon isn't happening, and it's because I'm not scummy. How about staple's replacement having yet to say anything of value? After staple's play, I'd say that's much scummier than anything I've done. Muh and Pom are scummier still. So instead of tunneling me, try to get reads on all the other players in this game.

[bigmc109]

As deadline is coming, I would be up for a bigmac lunch, but I do think muh is scummier. WW hasn't done anything either; votes just kinda slid off of him. But as we need some semblance of a consensus, I'll

Vote: Bigmac

.

Probably I'll be accused of being scum, and changing from buddying to voting quickly to keep with the town. But I didn't buddy. I did agreed with him once or twice, but I don't see how it was buddying.

Agreeing with me once or twice and then changing your vote to me is not a good reason to accuse you of being scum. But changing your vote to me when I'm (for all intents and purposes) at L-1 while offering zero explanation is suspicous. Doing it while claiming you think two (or one, I can't tell) people are scummier is just ridiculous. All you've basically said is that we need a lynch today, so you might as well vote the person with the most votes. Again, this is ridiculous.

Vote: Pom

. A pro-town player doesn't cast a (essentially) deciding vote on someone when they aren't even convinced he's scum. Scum players cast a deciding vote when they're sure someone is town.

[bigmc109]

malpascp: Why did you vote me? Why am I a better lynch than Pom and muh?

[bigmc109]

Ojanen, that quote which says "bigmc wrote" should read "Pom wrote". Way to completely misquote me.

[bigmc109]

WW, can you please answer crypto's question? You're really not doing us any good right now. At this point, your "I'm about to be lynched" argument is void, so just play the game already.

[bigmc109]

I don't think we should be so quick to lynch WW; he is such a VI it isn't even funny. I think looking at muh will pay better dividends. At least muh has done things that have actually been scummy; Staple did, but WW really hasn't.

[bigmc109]

[quote=hiphop]Bmc- what changed your opinion of ww? Yesterday you wanted the lynch, and now you don't.[/quote]

Two reasons:

1. One of my main reasons for voting Staple was "he doesn't want to play and yet doesn't replace out. This seems like something scum would do". Once he actually did replace out, I unvoted WW, in part because of that fact. This lowered him from my #1 suspect to just being scummy. Then this happened....

2. WW has yet to really do much that can really be considered "scummy". Anti-town? Sure. But this whole "policy-lynching" bandwagon has me suspicious. I agree with Sando. It seems like scum's dream: people going after a townie because he's useless. Hell, they could even do a little distancing while still being on the same bandwagon; some say it's just a policy lynch, others say he's scummy. WW is the perfect scapegoat. Some might say it's good to cut off some fat, but the fact is

we don't need to

. Stop trying to lynch the VI and look for scum.

Sando's last post strikes me as incredibly pro-town. Crypto's tunneling is making me

vote: Crypto

. BTW, crypto, muh has a very valid point.

[bigmc109]

Sorry for not posting, my laptop came and I've been playing around with it. Will read closer shortly....would appreciate if no one hammered me before I defend myself.

[bigmc109]

I completely forgot about this game. And after a quick read through since my last post, it looks like not much has changed. This is hypocritical, but the amount of lurking and inactivity in this game is mind blowing. By "inactivity", I mean lack of debate and effective scum hunting. I think it's safe to say everyone has pretty much locked in their opinion for today, which is a shame, because it means every post is now pretty much useless. I like my vote where it is, right on the man who has been OMGUS-y for at least all of Day 2 and parades around his views like he's the God of this game and knows everyone's alignment....hm....

Crypto, your play has changed drastically since our last game. Your attitude is the same, but man did you get a lot less analytical.

And no, I won't be claiming.

[bigmc109]

For the record, it was coincidence.

[bigmc109]

And by the way, you-know-who, thanks for the votes. As if it wasn't stacked enough.....back to minis for me I guess....

[bigmc109]

As I've discovered....when I first signed up for this game, I thought Large normals were the shit, kinda the "way Mafia is supposed to be played". Not so much though.

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

Super Accurate* Vote Count(as of post 1000):

bigmc109 - 7(charter, Kaiveran, hiphop, Pyromaniac, Empking, The Inquisition, crypto)
crypto - 3(muh316, bigmc109, Sando)
Kaiveran - 1(peanutman)
muh316 - 1(mask man)

Not Voting:Trumpet of Doom, malpascp

It takes 8 to lynch, 6 at deadline.

*Not guaranteed to be accurate.

[bigmc109]

Well, to be honest I've always been more interested in modding, but I gotta do something between now and whenever I'm at the top of the queue. As I just deminstrated, I tend to forget about things when I stop participating.

[bigmc109]

No. To be honest, I kinda bs'ed it cuz I wanted someone to analyze me. lol

[bigmc109]

Like I even care at this point....