Newbie 841 - Game over!

[PaltryExcuse]

EBWOP: I think it's obvious, but 'she' is T-chan in the above post.

[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.

[PaltryExcuse]

Alright. My main suspect right now is Pablo.
We’ve all seen the case against Pablo by havingfitz early in Day 2. I do have some observations to make based on the fact that we know Bob/DN was a mafia roleblocker.

Pablo’s comments on Day 1:
Pablo admitted to acting weird early on in Day 1, mentioning that he was deliberately lying low.

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 deliberately attracts attention to himself, basically telling everyone that he was actively lurking. Why bring attention to yourself? Hm.

Next up:

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.

Now he admonishes any guilt by semi-asking a rhetorical question. “Obviously it’s not scummy” is implied in the post. I question why an experienced player, such as Pablo, would deliberately call attention to himself as he did. From what I’ve read, a good strategy with a power role is to draw a little bit of attention to you so you aren’t night killed. With T-chan as cop, and ABR as doctor, that leaves no other power roles left. Why would someone draw attention? Perhaps because you don’t want the roleblocker lynched Day 1, just in case mafia is playing against power roles (which turned out to be the case). As mafia goon, Pablo, early on, made himself a suspect. Knowing he had real life obligations coming up, Pablo jumped on the chance with OMG, yet looked the suspect himself. This, combined with his lackluster defense (which still reads to me as more of an attack), brings me to believe Pablo is our final scum.

[PaltryExcuse]

Pablo’s comments on Day 2:
While looking at Day 2, I was looking specifically at DeathNote/almightybob’s, as well as any posts where one of us living members talks to or about the dead roleblocker. Pablo overall was much more active Day 2 due to his lessened amount of distractions. So he must’ve had something to say about T-chan’s case or Bob’s defense.

Post 278:

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.

*Right after T-chan’s first outlining of the case.

Post 280:

...

Did he give a reason, VRK?

*This refers to DeathNote’s departure.

Post 294:

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

*This refers to the reason DeathNote gave for his departure.

Post 336:

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.

*This is a comment on a point that Bob made.

Post 403:

"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

That’s about it. Firstly, Pablo comments on the case against DN saying he can see the legitimacy. What worries me about this entire thing is the only times Pablo talks to or about Bob. These posts respond to Bob pointing out something about ABR, and when Bob has revealed that he is, in fact, mafia.
For 67 posts, Pablo is still active. So where is his focus? ABR.
Pablo questions ABR’s every little move. I will note here, that ABR wasn’t acting the towniest he ever has. However, the monster posts by Bob and responses by T-chan are left completely response-less. The post that brought me to suspect that this was the case was Post 336. Pablo is first to respond to Bob’s defense. Or should I say,

after

, as it is pretty obvious by the post that he doesn’t respond to it at all. He then distances himself from Bob, until Bob reveals he is scum.
It is a continuation of DON’T LET THE ROLEBLOCKER DIE! As pointed out by fitz already, the goon needed to kill the doctor in order to not lose. So, with concerns expressed over ABR’s play, there’s a new target.

Vote: Pablo Molinero

[havingfitz]

Well that stinks...I'm

v/LA until Friday evening (4pm e.s.t.)

and will have to wait to hear what TC has to say. Welcome Starbuck...

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Official Vote Count

Pablo Molinero - 1 (PaltryExcuse)

Not Voting - 4 (havingfitz, Pablo Molinero, Starbuck, Tororingu-chan)

3 to Lynch.

Deadline

is the end of Sunday, November 8.

[Tororingu-chan]

Sorry about that everyone, I had some connection problems~~ ._.;;;
Well, I was mostly fishing for reactions, but I have an innocent on Starbuck (ronnieroo)! ^_^

[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?

[Tororingu-chan]

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

[Tororingu-chan]

More later, 4am, T-chan is tired... x_x

[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.

[PaltryExcuse]

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.

[PaltryExcuse]

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.

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.

@ABR: I'd think you'd have the most broad perspective considering you came into this game later. Are your suspicions on ronnie still worth the vote you threw at him Day 1 and why?

In my questions post, 2 posts later, I say I think he'd have the most broad perspective. I wasn't happy with his deference to us to make a case and/or probe for answers. I do try to include him post-haste. After you and havingfitz stop going at it, I try to get him to be included again:

All joking aside ABR, I'd appreciate some comments on the action these past few days. However, the disappearance of DeathNote, and now Ronnie, is a bit disconcerting. It's been 4 days since DeathNote last posted here, and 3 since Ronnie did.
Just a little bit of searching: DeathNote's last post was an hour and a half ago, while Ronnie's most recent post is #250 in this game.
@Mod: Prod's please?

Long story short: the first person to point out ABR's inactivity was

me

.

Secondly, to deal with your flippant disregard for my Day 1 case, it is a completely different interpretation than one previously had. I try to show that you deliberately draw attention. I say that the only reason to do this, is to make yourself not as much of a nightkill candidate (i.e. you have a power role) or you're trying to distract from some other issue(i.e. A save the roleblocker campaign).

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.

My case says: no, that makes no sense. How does someone ignore a case that is going on right around them? Not talking about someone and not talking with someone can be distancing yourself, especially when at that point I find that the majority of posts are about the other case. Bob makes a comment on ABR, then Fitz makes a small analysis of ABR's play, and now your focus is there. Point of the matter is I doubt scum would want to bring attention back to the case by T-chan. Talking about it might give the case more validity. 'Look, a distraction!' springs to mind.
Also, putting quotation marks around certain words doesn't make my "case" on you "distancing" less valid.

[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.

[Tororingu-chan]

I am trying very hard to tell whether Pablo is scum or

really thinks like that.

@_@; Frankly, that's a horrible case against PE. I'm not convinced at all~ T_T; You are seriously trying to paint him as scummy for being on a townie lynch??

I was on a townie lynch! I

led

the townie lynch! Am I suspicious then?? >_<;;

Not to mention, you didn't even

comment

on the case against DN (which is worse than "dismissing" it, which PE didn't really), and actually, your case against him is a lot weaker than his. Who's championing weak cases now? @_@;;

Points A, B, and C... all failed~ ^_^

Luckily, unlike you, I don't vote people simply because they make bad cases. I like to consider that hey, maybe they just play that way... ^_^; That doesn't make them scum then.

I have school now, so I'll read up on your completed games and come to a conclusion later! d(^u^)b

[Tororingu-chan]

Oh just FYI, I'm primarily looking at D2 DeathNote/almightybob interactions~
I have:

1) Pablo, who didn't even comment on the case! o_o
2) Havingfitz, who outright stated he didn't believe that DN was scum....
3) PaltryExcuse, halfheartedly agreed but never took a strong stance anywhere, until now.

[PaltryExcuse]

Alright, Post 434: Personally, I’m a bit confused as to how I’d come off scummy by the end of this post. The main idea is that I’m bussing

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.

Just because I didn't mention my intentions before hand doesn't mean I haven't considered other possibilities. And obviously, I don't think my case is flimsy.

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.

The link to fitz makes some sense, but would make more if I had never expressed suspicions of you. Obviously, not the case here. However, the T-Chan connection makes none. So you were a bit vicious towards T-chan... I think she's moved on. Personally, I think a display of emotions is a null-tell. Frustration is natural. You're underestimating both T-chan and fitz.

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.

That's not the entire post. The question I ask ABR in the same post is about ronnieroo. Basically, I asked a question based on the last suspicions of each of the people had at the end of Day 1. The question is about you, but the entire post isn't.

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.

Mentioning I suspect him is not a way of doing anything?

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.

This is where the case against me starts to fall apart. At this point, a lynch of the roleblocker is almost certain death. If the mafia members are facing no roles, the bus will go over ok. If the mafia is facing power roles, well, the goon needs to kill the doctor. Why would I highlight negative points about DeathNote if I was scum? I wouldn't. It’s like asking for a 50% chance of death.

[PaltryExcuse]

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.

It made DeathNote's defense a bit more plausible. However, right at the end I want him to clarify something. When did DeathNote start suspecting OMG? Page 5, according to almightybob. Here's some context: T-chan had just highlighted the fact that Post 174 DeathNote mentions there is nothing serious to go on.

@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.

His answer made him see more scummy. From the previous post to this one, I go from saying his case is 'pretty solid', to thinking there is a major problem with his argument. I call him suspicious, I'm watching him... I'd say I'm near ready to vote for him. In retrospect, yep, I thought he was the scummiest and should've. I was being a bit cautious as last time my vote led to a lynch. So sue me.

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.

Honestly, I thought I was participating. I didn't think I was leading discussion, just contributing.

@havingfitz: You seem to wonder why I got you to explain your argument of hypocrisy against Pablo. The reason is, the case is much clearer and defined when you explain the posts you're referring to rather than giving a blanketed statement with references. It allows me to see your thought processes, and lets me decide whether or not it makes sense. It also saves me time.

In the argument of fitz vs. Pablo:
I'm currently leaning towards a vote for Pablo.
Pablo's early play was contradictory, or at the very least confusing. Although he recognized this, it doesn't change the matter that his actions were. Pablo's was the first vote against OMG, although T-chan first brought up the matter of OMG's suspicious behaviour. It was suspicious, my problem is not in his regard of OMG at that point. My question to you, Pablo, regarding whether or not you found OMG scummy at the end of day 1 (before fitz's hammer), has gone untouched. Pablo argued that fitz willingly omitted parts of your posts to aid his case, however the parts he left out do not change anything in regards to his points (neither making nor breaking it; see my 2nd to last post for explanation). The beginning admitted odd behaviour, and the false accusations of misrepresentation lead me to believe that Pablo is more likely scum than fitz.

However, I'm not convinced yet. The reason is in the second part of Pablo's case against fitz. Firstly, I believe fitz was coaxing a 5th vote, something he has admitted in a way.

I wasn't shying away...when the votes for OMG were getting fewer I was basically resigned to the fact he wasn't going anywhere (at least before a replacement was made) and once that replacement was made, it was only common courtesy to let the replacement have their say.

Coaxing that 5th vote does look scummy. The other part that irks me is the fact that he wants to reduce the prospects of replacements, something that confuses me. Obviously, the need for replacements is not a good thing, but active replacements can be better than those they are 'succeeding'. Just a weird vibe off that line is all.

I won't vote yet, simply because I'm not convinced either is scum. It definitely seems as though one or the other is, but I'm not satisfied. I expect Pablo and fitz to respond, but I'd really appreciate any more third party perspective on the matter.

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?

@havingfitz: What does RayFrost suspecting Pablo and believing you help you? He was being truthful (or I assume he was as townie), but he died with less information than we have now.

My stance at that point in time is that you looked more scummy, but not scummy enough to vote for. I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who said that. Secondly, my asking questions provoke answers. I get to understand more of another's perspective. If you needed to hear what I thought, I told you. If you needed clarification, you need but asked. Because I took the initiative to clarify other people's arguments doesn't mean I'm parroting, it means I'm exploring. When I thought I had a case, I gave it. Just because you make a case before me, or more often, doesn't make you more town.

[PaltryExcuse]

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.

I just misinterpreted your intentions when you were mentioning the scum vote. So in other words, we agree that it is a null-tell. Where in your post do you mention it was a null-tell? This is not me parroting. However, your wording does lend to this misinterpretation. According to your post, it looks like I'm scummy for two reasons, havingfitz is scummy for one, and you are neutral on both counts.

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.

Obviously I disagree, but enough has been said on the issue. A lynch being necessary on day 1 makes sense.

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.

BAH! This is just outright lying now. Fitz and I did pursue a lynch on our main scum target, OMG.
I agreed with you initially on Fitz's odd behaviour of putting Lyncher at L-1. I questioned Mitey when she finally removed her random vote. I critique Ronnie's defense of OMG (the fact that a newbie defense is illegitimate was brought up by me). Fitz questions you and Mitey. We were keeping our avenues open. However, the top of my scumlist was OMG. So, I voted for him.

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.

If someone looks like they're going to be lynched, what is the point for scum to push it along? Secondly, DeathNote was on the lynch. That is the scum presence required by your logic. Can't tell me he wasn't pushing for a lynch.
And the comment about me trying too hard? In your argument, you have said that I was not being original enough, and coming up with my own ideas. Now that I have one, and its you, I'm doing it too hard? How convenient. This isn't the first time you've contradicted yourself. Havingfitz followed your advice, and voted for the person he felt was most scummy. Then, you jump on him.

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.

It makes perfect sense to me. I show I was questioning ABR before your posts even mention anything.

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.

This doesn't make your point at all. Firstly, you've omitted the rest of my post where I go on to say that it makes logical sense to NOT mention it. Your basic point in this is that I'm scummy because I suspected him, and then was influenced by his defense. However, later, I state I still find him suspicious and that I am watching him.

Finally, your most recent post:

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

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.

[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.