Newbie 841 - Game over!

[havingfitz]

So, why would you have to wait for me to finish my analysis when you have been here the whole time?

You should definitely have a feel for who you think is scum or not without my opinion on the matter.

I have made my 'feel' perfectly clear...you did read my posts after all. If I had voted Pablo before you had got involved in the game, and TC hammered....then we potentially go to day four without hearing from you at all (save your intro post) and having a chance to get a fresh insights into the game.

Do you find taking other people's opinions into account a negative? Especially those who are confirmed town?

[Starbuck]

No, but you did this once already when Ray replaced in. It didn't seem to matter what he said because you hammered/voted anyways.

It seemed like the same deal here. It wouldn't matter who I voted for or talked about. You were gonna vote the same way anyways.

[havingfitz]

Ray wasn't confirmed town, he replaced a person I suspected was most likely scum and I did not think he would be able to change my mind (and he didn't).

You did replace confirmed town and if this game goes to day four....you hold the deciding vote.

[Starbuck]

That's not my point whether Ray was confirmed or not. You made it blatantly obvious with your hammer vote that it wouldn't have mattered what he said. You are opportunistic scum.

[Pablo Molinero]

Bah, I have been poked. Catching up.

[PaltryExcuse]

I shouldn't be doing this while in class... but right now I have some doubts toward havingfitz I didn't have before. I'm gonna look over Starbuck's case in detail and then vote again. Until then:

Unvote

[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.

[havingfitz]

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).

[havingfitz]

You are opportunistic scum.

You are a lousy detective which I will point out in the long reply I am putting together. If I go today you should be extremely happy with your undermining of the town's chances to win this game.

[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.

[PaltryExcuse]

About fitz: He says he hasn't posted his defense against Starbuck, so I'll wait before I vote either way or ask any questions about it. Post 509 seems nasty though.

About Pablo:

This sounds like I'm trying to sweet-talk Paltry

I'd like to think this wouldn't work against me anyways.
However, I do have a question about your more recent posts:

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.

How does the old case come into play now, instead of before, when you voted and pressured me?

[Starbuck]

You are opportunistic scum.

You are a lousy detective which I will point out in the long reply I am putting together. If I go today you should be extremely happy with your undermining of the town's chances to win this game.

I'm a lousy detective? I think you are just upset because I have a very, very good case on you and you can't debunk by saying "she's inactive, let's lynch her" or "she's gotta be scum" because I'm confirmed.

I definitely think I caught you, and you are upset about it. Nice appeal to emotion though, it's a good try, but a failure.

[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.

[havingfitz]

I definitely feel that the case on OMGL was very weak and it seemed like everyone else was just parroting off what Pablo or T-chan said. That being said, so far it just seems like a very easy/opportunistic lynch for the scum.

I'd also like to mention that DeathNote is at the typical scum third vote on the RayFrost/OMGL bandwagon.

By typical I assume you mean a trend...and a quick look of ten completed Mafia games that lynched a townie on day one shows 80% of the games only had one Scum vote on the lynch. None of the games I looked at (Road to Rome Newbie games: 835, 832, 831, 830, 825, 817, 816, 813, 808, 806) had no mafia on the lynch and the remaining 20% had both on the lynch. So significantly more often then not, when a townie goes first, there will only be one scum on the lynch.

On havingfitz

He stays very quiet. I know I'm just catching up, but I keep forgetting that he's in the game with how little he posts.

Like I said before though...the only person close to getting a vote for me at the moment would be OMG and even then I would need to look over his posts again.

This bothers me because it seems like you are just following the crowd, and the fact that you would need to look over his posts again proves your uncertainty.

I didn’t get into the swing of the game until the 4th page. By then most or all of the points I found suspicious of OMG had been brought up already. If the ‘crowd’ has given what you (I) believe are valid suspicions...aren’t you (I) allowed to accept and act on those suspicions as well? Throughout the course of Day one, OMG was my main suspect but I hadn’t ruled anyone else out because as you have already pointed out...there were still two scum in the game at this point.

I definitely don't agree with the lynch on OMGL as I said in my last analysis post. I definitely think it was driven by opportunistic scum. Knowing his alignment, it's very obvious that he was a frustrated townie, and the fact that the "experienced" players in this game didn't pick up on this bothers me greatly.

Knowing OMGs alignment as you now do it’s easy to disagree with his lynch.

On havingfitz

He takes a very opportunistic jump onto the OMGL wagon in Post 141. I also don't like how he seems to go out of his way to analyze why he thinks that the person putting the 5th vote (or in this case the hammer vote on someone) would not increase his suspicions of them. And the fact that he mentions that his vote will get to a lynch quicker bothers me.

The timing of your vote, havingfitz, really is odd. The thing that scares me more is the fact that you're inviting us to vote out OMG and stating

no consequences or suspicions

from yourself. In that situation if someone threw on a 5th vote I would think them reckless and scummy. It reeks of a quicklynch now that we've waited for many days waiting for an OMG response.

This. QFT.

1.) I’m an impatient person. If everyone was actively participating I would be in no hurry to end the first day.

Being impatient in a mafia game is a BAD thing. I know at the time of this post that OMGL hadn't posted in 5 days, but lynching someone who can't defend themselves is scummy.

I don’t think two weeks into the game is a quicklynch…especially when OMG has been the scum focus of the game and has had votes on him for most of the game.

I agree two weeks is definitely not a quicklynch especially at the rate this game seemed to be going, but your entrance onto the wagon is definitely scummy.

How is an entrance onto a wagon scummy? Are you saying every L-1 vote is scummy (as apparently is an L-2 and a hammer vote)? How do you think people get lynched? As for all the other questions above... I have addressed them in full in post 148. I can cut and paste the entire post but to not make this post twice as long I would appreciate it if you would just read it, I can’t make those points any better than I did.

What bothers me here is that you just admit to voting for him because he's the focus and has the most votes. You, more or less, make a small post about Mitey and then tunnel on OMGL for the rest of the day.

OMG did defend himself and his weak defense is one of the things being held against him. Weren’t you the one who encouraged us to pile on the votes?

He's still new though, newer than yourself. It seems to me that quite a few people in this game aren't looking at that fact.

And this is a different negative how? I had two days of Mafia under my belt at this point in our game...OMG was my top suspect...for reasons identified by others....who were also suspicious of/voting him. I’m newer than you and you are using points brought up by others. For shame.

I agree that the L-1 and 5th votes are actions that warrant suspicion. I tried to preface my vote with my reasoning as best that I could. After re-reading my vote post before I submitted it...I could not consider a potential 5th vote after mine as suspicious without being a total hypocrite. Which I try not to do. I've had OMG as my main suspect since last week...as have others. I don't look forward to my main suspect being replaced. I gave my thoughts on it being a quicklynch above…I don’t think it would be one.

The contradictions in this post, and the contradictions with your previous posts with the post bother me. You agree that L-1 and hammer votes are actions that warrant suspicion, but then you contradict yourself and say that you can't consider the hammer after your L-1 vote to be suspicious.

You say you were suspicious of OMG since the week prior, but you basically parrot off of what everyone else says with your suspicion of him. I mentioned it in my first analysis and I'll mention it again. You definitely are following the crowd here.

You also repeat yourself quite a bit that you don't look forward to him being replaced. I get a very scummy feeling from this because you jumped on the wagon since he couldn't defend himself and you don't want a replacement to come in to defend themselves and possibly debunk your already weak case.

How am I following the crowd? What constitutes following the crowd? Being any vote past the second vote? Agreeing with points that have already been raised by other (that you think are valid)? Is a player only allowed to use suspicions that he or she uncovers themself? Are all persons who place an L-2->hammer vote certified scum? Anything I have failed to address so far I think is in post 148.

While a large part of my last few days posting has been based on a desire to move things along...it is also with the most likely scum candidate at the moment in mind and not having to deal with his replacement and the replacement's efforts to remove the scum stain left by OMG (which I would have a hard time accepting).

I definitely do not like the tone in this. OMGL really didn't leave such a huge stain of scumminess as you are painting here. The tunneling of OMGL is noted.

Once again...you have the hindsight of knowing OMG was town whereas I did not. I had other suspects...Pablo from 107 and MiteyMouse from 131...both posts of which were fairly soon after I got into the swing of the game. I had my main suspect but was not oblivious to other candidates. You can only lynch one person at a time so if going after your main suspect is tunnelling then I guess I was tunnelling. Are you tunnelling me?

On Tororingu-chan

Hmmm~~ I find it odd that havingfitz seems to think that OMGLyncher is guaranteed scum and would rather lynch him now rather than wait for a replacement~ >_<;

Yet at this point in time I would still prefer an OMGLyncher lynch.... havingfitz rushing into things only shows that havingfitz is impatient, not that he is scum... ^_^

Wow, what a contradiction here.

How can that only show that havingfitz is impatient? I definitely have pointed out quite a few scummy things with havingfitz and I'm rather bothered that you just dismiss that with a wave of your hand.

You seem awfully determined to indict me.

On Tororingu-chan

See what I find funny about HF thinking that Ray/OMG is guaranteed Scum is that it smels of PIS (perfect infrmation syndrome). What I find funnier is that you point this out and then defend him T-Chan.

I'm very glad that Mitey pointed this out when it happened as it's exactly what I'm currently thinking.

As I have already stated (posts 151 and 159), I can not guarantee anyone is scum and nowhere do I mention OMG is guaranteed scum.

I noticed it, and it was odd, but at this point in time I don't consider him scummier than OMGLyncher~~ ^_^ So far, I'm willing to accept his explanation that he's just really impatient, since I can see how it's possible to be exasperated at the rate this game is (was) moving.. @_@;;

I don't like your willingness to accept that he's just impatient. You definitely are defending havingfitz. I also don't like that after MM pointed you out as defending havingfitz that you get all up in arms about it.

Once again...you are dismissing an opinion that goes against your suspicions. You have your mind set it looks like. As TC is a cop I guess she’s not defending me as a scum buddy. She must be expressing a genuine opinion with no ulterior motives.

On DeathNote

DN - I put him here, but he's obv. scum. he's obviously the one manipulating events so I replace into games with him in them seriously though, no real read on him so far.

Ray, I hope you are reading along and I hope you are basking in the fact that you were right about DeathNote with your first sentence.

I mean, seriously, wtf. Why didn't you guys jump on DeathNote during Day 1? His very obvious scumminess is screaming at me.

That hindsight 20/20 is awfully clear. And how was Ray right? He said he had no real read.

On havingfitz

I thought you learned your lesson in my last (& first...816) game. Always make your analysis post first. You did the same thing in that game...showed up way late Japan time...said you'd have a read and get back to us. Then you were lynched to end the game before you had a chance to speak.

I definitely do not care for this post. I mean seriously, someone can't check in to say hi before they do their analysis?

Seriously...can you take a joke? In my only other game up to that point, Ray had replaced in and was lynched before he had a chance to give any input. I was simply messing with him which he appears to have understood in his next post with a smile.

MM...nowhere do I make any reference to OMG being guaranteed scum. He was #1 on my list last week...as he was for a few others...but my suspicions on him were not the only reasons for my vote on him (as I have explained in detail). Don't put words in my mouth to justify your attempt to shift negative sentiment my way. I would focus more on the content of your posts. For someone with as much experience as you and so willing to help the IC...your posts don't have a lot of meat to them.

Do you have any other reasons to suspect me besides your faulty accusation that I think OMG was guaranteed scum?

What about this:

While a large part of my last few days posting has been based on a desire to move things along...it is also with the most likely scum candidate at the moment in mind and not having to deal with his replacement and the replacement's efforts to remove the scum stain left by OMG (which I would have a hard time accepting).

You say right there that you would have a hard time accepting a replacement's efforts to remove the scum stain, which to me (and obviously to MM) is you stating that you think he's guaranteed scum.

<knocking head on computer> OMG was my primary suspect. If people want to infer guaranteed scum from scum stain (which you are the only one doing that I am aware of) then I don’t know what to say. I used that choice of words

after

TC mentioned ‘guaranteed scum’...and in my interpretation, MM was adding on to TC’s mention of ‘guaranteed scum’...not my use of ‘scum stain’.

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 hits the nail on the head here.


How funny that havingfitz goes on and on how the hammer vote wouldn't be looked on as being suspicious by him, and he goes and hammers. And his reason now for his vote is that RayFrost hasn't done enough since he replaced in to change his mind.

What nail did Pablo hit? Please see my post 159 where I explain my FoS on Ray.

I have low scum reads on all the people voting for RF while my top three suspects are sending their votes elsewhere. Seems like my odds (assuming my 'gut' is right) of hitting scum are decent.

Well, guess you are kinda wrong here with the fact that DeathNote was on the RayFrost/OMGL bandwagon.

Lots of people have been kind of wrong in this game. With the knowledge of my role...I can think of at least one other person who is kind of wrong. I stand by the quote above....it was in reference to the fact I did not think both scum would be on the lynch (which is supported by the findings I got when reviewing completed games). I assumed one would be on the lynch and one wouldn’t. The three who weren’t voting for OMG/Ray were Ray (my #1 suspect) Pablo (my #2 and TBD) and MM who turned up town.

On ABR

One thing I want to mention about ABR is that I've played with him before and although I see he was V/LA, his posts in general really didn't impress me especially knowing now that he was the doc.

What's funny about all this is that the maf took the shot at ABR, probably figuring that there was a Doc out there that could protect T-chan. But I don't think they anticipated that he was the doc.

With Almightybob’s vote on ABR prior to TC coming out...ABR was practically confirmed town (unless he was bussing) so a confirmed town was the logical move for the remaining scum to make. Luckily for scum they hit the doctor as well.

On havingfitz

That sucked. Two of my top three suspects turn out to be town. Obviously any gut feel/intuition I've got needs re-adjusted.

At least my odds of hitting scum have improved.

This just screams scumminess to me.

I can’t argue with an opinion. Even if I didn’t have the insight that your intuitions were wrong...I still wouldn’t know how to respond to this.

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.

And when the replacement did have their say you placed the hammer vote because you didn't like what they said and they didn't do enough to change your mind, but you didn't state WHY or WHAT you didn't like.

Even Ray admitted hid defense of OMG’s actions was rambly and the best he could give. It was no defense. After Ray replaced in DN unvoted, Paltry voted, DN voted, ABR voted, and then I voted. I gave him more time than anyone to make a defense. He didn’t make a good one...TC brought up a good observation IMO about Ray thinking Roo was scummy for defending OMG (him)...that tipped the balance for my hammer vote.

I'm definitely not liking the case he makes on Pablo in Post 246. He cuts out half of Pablo's Post 70 and only uses the part that makes himself look good. His entire statement about hypocrisy at all is null and void to me.

Have you read any of my posts? As I stated already...In my initial comments that Pablo is referring to I had referenced back to posts which people could have read unedited...then Paltry asked me this “@Fitz: If you could line up exactly what parts of Pablo's posts you see as hypocritical it would be much more clear for me.” Which is what I did.

1. You and Pablo were not the only ones focusing on OMGL. At that point, everyone in the game was focusing on him.

And your point is? If everyone else is focusing on OMG and I (we) do it...it counts against me?

2. Urging activity is part of being a good IC and being a mafia player in general.

But urging activity while being one of the most inactive members is not (ex Pablo)

3. I have said before that OMGL gave me the impression of a frustrated townie, but others do take lurking out of a game (depending on the actions of the person) as a scum tell. You also did this, so I don't understand your reasoning here.

I don’t understand your question.

4. Prompting to cast votes is also part of being a good IC. The best thing that townies have are their vote. The fact that you are jumping on him for asking people to use their vote bothers me.

He specifically called me out in the post where he encourages us to vote (see post 70). That’s one of the reasons I gained suspicion towards Pablo. I think when people encourage others to do something and then hold it against them...that is manipulating the game and scummy.

5. A lot of people dislike replacements, how is this in anyway related to the situation at hand?

I don’t like replacements...more so for people I think are suspicious....OMG was my main suspect and he was replaced. That’s how it’s related.

Pablo, who doesn't like replacements and wants people to vote and be active, denounces my downgrading of my vote on RayFrost (which I have explained in detail was to allow him (RF) to state his case) and looks forward to seeing how Ray responds. ? Isn't this what I am trying to achieve as well? <=Hypocrisy>

In summary....Pablo has: urged us to be active, to pile on votes, stated his dislike of replacements, used OMG's lack of activity as a reason to suspect OMG, and been willing to hear OMGs replacement state his case and hypocritically, Pablo has been: the least active on the board, vehemently objected to my vote on his main suspect (OMG), and criticized my willingness (however reluctant it may have been) to allow OMG's replacement to have his say in the very same post where he (Pablo) announces he is looking forward to hearing OMG's replacement's response as well. And then Pablo disappears until Ray is gone.

1. To me, it seemed like you couldn't care what RayFrost said because he would never redeem the actions of OMGL to you, and you state this in the post where you hammer him. So what was the point of you unvoting in the first place?

Answered in posts 159 and 171

3. Where has he been the least active? If you are going to say this, I want to see numbers.

I made this point in post 246. At that point in the game Pablo was the least active (unless you treat Mafia_failure and OMG without their replacements which would not make sense...but even their replacements had out posted Pablo)...VRK posts not included either:

ABR 19
RayFrost 17

DeathNote 32
havingfitz 22
Mafia_failure + ABR 30
MiteyMouse 19
OMGLyncher + RayFrost 24
Pablo Molinero 15
PaltryExcuse 26
ronnieroo 17
Tororingu_chan 49

4. Why can't he object to your scummy jump onto the wagon? Whether or not it's the same person he suspects holds no water.

I voted because I suspected OMG. I felt Pablo was scummy for admonishing me for voting (the same person he was voting) when he had encouraged votes...and named me specifically.


I need a break before I see if more needs responded to.

[havingfitz]

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.

My goodness....your nose is brown.

I admit your case was weak. How else would you interpret your admitting you appeared to be on the losing side of the argument? Interpret reality to your liking much? Your actions over the last several posts have screamed scum to me. Quick flip...sucking up to Starbuck and the person you spent most of day three voting for. No sweet nothings for TC?

[havingfitz]

Post 509 seems nasty though.

Nothing nasty about it. Starbucks is stating opinion when she calls me "opportunistic scum" and I am stating fact with the benefit of hindsight and knowing my role.

He||, it appeared she was on pace to have TC as one of her top suspects until she realized she was a cop...and I know whether her current vote is on target, she does not. There is also the added frustration of having the entire fate of this game of several weeks be placed in the hands of someone who has waited a week to show any involvement and then when she does...gets it wrong.

[havingfitz]

I'm a lousy detective? I think you are just upset because I have a very, very good case on you and you can't debunk by saying "she's inactive, let's lynch her" or "she's gotta be scum" because I'm confirmed.

I definitely think I caught you, and you are upset about it. Nice appeal to emotion though, it's a good try, but a failure.

Yes.

You are relegated to thinking you caught me. That's a step down from knowing whether you have or not (which I do know...along with the remaining scum). And I don't think you have a good case...all you have done is "parrot" points others have brought up which I have already addressed. If parroting is not acceptable when voting for suspected scum...why are you doing it? 17 or 18 pages of material is a lot to catch up with and your cursory investigation has failed you.

[Starbuck]

Btw, telling me to re-read when I just reread the whole game is rather redundant. I have the game fresh in my head, and I highlighted everything I found scummy of you and now I have to go back and repeat myself again to you.


1. By typical, I mean that you can normally find scum right in the middle of the wagon. Typically the third vote in a Newbie Game. Way to get what I was saying wrong.

2. So you are admitting to parroting and the fact that everyone else built a case and you figured you'd ride it out. You can accept others' cases, but you ALWAYS build your own and you never ride on the cases of others. That's scummy.

3. The thought never crossed your mind of "Maybe OMGL could be town?". I highly doubt this as you were definitely looking for an easy lynch.

4. Ronnie didn't know OMG's alignment and she disagreed with it, but no one stopped to even hear what she said. She took the EXACT stance I would have taken if I started this game from the beginning.

5. How is entrance onto a wagon scummy? I already explained this in the post that you refer to. You wanted to lynch OMGL quickly because you DID NOT want a replacement to come in to redeem him.

6. Where did I say that every L-1, L-2, and hammer vote is scummy? I NEVER said that. I only said that you going out of your way to point out that you wouldn't be suspect of whoever hammers was suspicious. Nice try on twisting my words.

7. How is it negative? You tunnel straight on OMG all day. You mention other suspects maybe once or twice, but all you do is talk about OMG like he made such a huge mistake. He was such an easy lynch that you took it, no questions asked because you knew that no matter what the replacement said, you'd still vote/hammer him, which you did.

8. What are you talking about that I'm using points brought up by others? If someone else already pointed out something before I did, that's good. I'm glad they caught it when it happened. It doesn't make you any less scummy.

9. Following the crowd is when you just go along with it without adding anything new to the case, and you didn't add anything to the case already on OMG. DeathNote was sitting there all day on Day 1, scummy as all hell, and you let that slip right past you because you were too busy focusing on an inactive player, OR you were trying to cover for DeathNote.

10. You say you had other suspects, but you don't focus on your other "suspects" who were active as hard as you focus on the inactive OMGL. You were so focused on OMGL's inactivity that you never noticed DeathNote's inactivity.

11. At that point in the game, you DID NOT know that T-C was a cop. So to use that now is quite WIFOM-y.

12. About Ray being right, I guess you don't understand sarcasm?

13. Your post to Ray definitely did not read to me as joking.

14. Pablo hit the nail on the head with the fact that you wanted to lynch OMGL before a replacement was found, pretty much silencing anything that the replacement would say. I already read your explanation on your FOS, but you already had insinuated that you did not care what the replacement had to say because it would do little to sway your vote. So your unvote and FOS just made you look scummier.

15. Why would you assume that both scum would be on the lynch? Just because it didn't happen in your previous games, doesn't mean that it didn't/couldn't happen here.

16. So you go and list the 3 people who didn't vote for Ray and include Ray on the list? Come on dude, a townie isn't going to give in to their lynch. Nor give the scum the satisfaction of hammering themselves.

17. So how was ABR confirmed town?

18. I have read your posts. I JUST READ THE ENTIRE FREAKING GAME. When you are that far along in the game, you give the courtesy of either directly linking to a post that you are referring to, or quoting it. You don't just give post numbers.

19. The first moment I read OMGL's posts. I automatically got the feeling of a frustrated townie. You took his lurking out of the game as a scum tell and you are trying to use the same point in your case against Pablo.

20. You keep pointing me to other posts which I've already read. Obviously, they didn't do much or I still wouldn't be wanting you to elaborate!

[Starbuck]

Post 509 seems nasty though.

Nothing nasty about it. Starbucks is stating opinion when she calls me "opportunistic scum" and I am stating fact with the benefit of hindsight and knowing my role.

He||, it appeared she was on pace to have TC as one of her top suspects until she realized she was a cop...and I know whether her current vote is on target, she does not. There is also the added frustration of having the entire fate of this game of several weeks be placed in the hands of someone who has waited a week to show any involvement and then when she does...gets it wrong.

I read the game from the beginning and I did not know that she was a cop until I got to her claim post. I replace into a lot of games and I read every single one from the beginning.

Just because she is in the role of cop does not mean that she didn't do anything scummy.

I definitely feel a lot of emotion here. It sounds like a scum victory slipping away.

[Starbuck]

I'm a lousy detective? I think you are just upset because I have a very, very good case on you and you can't debunk by saying "she's inactive, let's lynch her" or "she's gotta be scum" because I'm confirmed.

I definitely think I caught you, and you are upset about it. Nice appeal to emotion though, it's a good try, but a failure.

Yes.

You are relegated to thinking you caught me. That's a step down from knowing whether you have or not (which I do know...along with the remaining scum). And I don't think you have a good case...all you have done is "parrot" points others have brought up which I have already addressed. If parroting is not acceptable when voting for suspected scum...why are you doing it? 17 or 18 pages of material is a lot to catch up with and your cursory investigation has failed you.

Where did I parrot?

If someone made the point I would have made if I was in this game from the beginning during the time of a certain post you made, I will definitely give them props for it.

Also, when a replacement replaces in and does an analysis, it's called that for a reason.

I still don't see where I'm parroting. I read through the game and pointed out what I thought was good and what I thought was scummy. That's what you do with an ANALYSIS. Also, 17 or 18 pages is nothing compared to the number of pages I normally catch up on when I replace into a game.

I have come up with my own case on you based on your actions. Now you are appealing to emotion big time.

[Starbuck]

I also love how you are trying so hard to make a case on me when T-C already confirmed me as town.

[PaltryExcuse]

@Starbuck:

Starting at the beginning of Day 3

On Havingfitz

That sucks that ABR was the doctor. If the doctor had made it through the night town would have been guaranteed the win. Now a town win is more like 50-50 unless TC guessed right during the night. As she had a 1-4 chance of investigating the right person I hope she chose wisely.

I love a bowl of WIFOM first thing in the morning.

Could you explain how this is WIFOM? I don't really understand this.

Following the crowd is when you just go along with it without adding anything new to the case, and you didn't add anything to the case already on OMG. DeathNote was sitting there all day on Day 1, scummy as all hell, and you let that slip right past you because you were too busy focusing on an inactive player, OR you were trying to cover for DeathNote.

I think during day 1 all four of us did that (let DN slip by). That is not really a point against havingfitz specifically.

@havingfitz:

How is an entrance onto a wagon scummy? Are you saying every L-1 vote is scummy (as apparently is an L-2 and a hammer vote)? How do you think people get lynched? As for all the other questions above... I have addressed them in full in post 148. I can cut and paste the entire post but to not make this post twice as long I would appreciate it if you would just read it, I can’t make those points any better than I did.

An entrance on a wagon, in general, is not guaranteed scummy. However, the timing of yours was odd, and you were voted for that and I also had issues with it at the time. There was no replacement, pressure was sufficiently supplied, and the vote seemed unneeded. The question for me is: Is your vote motivated by impatience (town) or is it motivated by mislynch (scum)?
Previously, I have argued impatience, as many expressed their dislike of the inactivity of Day 1. It made sense... however, is this an easy cop-out for scum? I don't know...

My goodness....your nose is brown.

I admit your case was weak. How else would you interpret your admitting you appeared to be on the losing side of the argument? Interpret reality to your liking much? Your actions over the last several posts have screamed scum to me. Quick flip...sucking up to Starbuck and the person you spent most of day three voting for. No sweet nothings for TC?

I think the flip has to do with ensuring his survival, something he has highlighted as necessary for himself before. This is just a continuation of these thoughts.

Overall: Right now, the case against fitz is reminiscent of the one Pablo made Day 2, as well as the flaws pointed out by me and others day 1. On that alone, I'd go for a vote on Pablo as I believed fitz before, and little had changed. The new info for me lies in the analysis that fitz could care less what Ray said when he replaced in. A lack of possible redemption, to paraphrase Starbuck.

[Starbuck]

1. He pretty much opens it up like he's rather aghast that the town lost the doctor, and makes it well known that town would be guaranteed a win if the doc was alive. Scum normally fake being upset about losing a PR during the night.

2. I think it is a point against havingfitz especially because I think he's scum. He could have easily just been keeping all of the focus on OMGL so that DeathNote could slip by unnoticed.


You seem to keep forgetting that there is still one scum left. I think that person is havingfitz. So one of the 4 of you didn't let DeathNote slip by, they HELPED him slip by.

[Tororingu-chan]

jlkkjladakla holy walls of text, Batman! @_@;;
Um... T-chan was sick for the past few days (and still has the sniffles now T_T), I'll catch up as soon as I can~ ^_^;;