Mini 884 - Last Man Standing (Over)

[ConfidAnon]

/confirm

[ConfidAnon]

Vote: don_johnson

[ConfidAnon]

por que,
CA?

may i
abstain?

Questioning an RVS vote? Your jumpiness when voted is noted. /unintentional rhyme

[ConfidAnon]

Because I don't feel like being serious right now.

Why do you intend you interrogate me so thoroughly?

Both him and DJ are jumpy, but nacho more so than DJ. Interesting.

Considering everyone else's Votes were very clearly RVS, I find this very interesting. I asked you which it was due to the ambiguity of it. With you getting defensive and dodging for a third time, I'm getting a very bad feeling about you.

UnVote/Vote:Nm8

Good post.

Initial reaction is that d3x blew up Nacho's vote, not really sure why. d3x did have two votes on him at the time so he could have been trying to get serious stuff going to get them off him. But two votes in the general scheme of things is really nothing. There was just something a little fake about his reaction to me.

Hmmm . . . I see absolutly nothing scummy about d3x questioning Nm8, and it's a stretch to call it scum trying to get out of two RVS votes. Note to self: If Nm8 flips scum, Sotty is suspicious for this defense.

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

Right now, Nacho is obviously scummy . . . but not enough so that it warrants a vote from me yet.

[ConfidAnon]

ConfidAnon, why so hesitant? If I'm OBVIOUSLY scummy, then I OBVIOUSLY deserve a vote. Right?

You've done scummy things in the thread, but doing scummy things don't neccessarily mean you are scum. Town and scum alike do scummy things, and my gut's telling me to hold off from voting you at the present time.

Unvote
Vote: ConfidAnon

Also vote for d3x, and benmage, if I could.

Any particular reasoning behind this?

if any of you have explained your random votes since and i have missed said explanations simply refer me to the post said information is contained within.

didn't notice sotty's and vp's right off the bat. confid's caught my eye because he actively avoided explaining his "random" vote when asked. random votes should be the easiest votes to explain in the game of mafia. not sure why someone would avoid discussing it altogether. also, not sure how asking "why?" in spanish is classified as an "overreaction" and relates to me being "jumpy".

Hooray for a post that's full of fail, courtesy of don_johnson!

In the quoted section, you've called votes random a few times. Random votes are just that, random. They require no explanation, they are just there to start conversation on Day 1. Please explain to me why a

random

vote requires justification?

Also, although it doesn't matter, I voted you because you were scum in a game where you got lynched and I got night killed right afterwards (ongoing, so can't specifically name it I don't think.)

note to confid: notes to self are explicitly not notes to self when published in thread. try a post-it pad.

post 85. no. no. no. please god... no.

top pick for scum: confidanon

So far what I'm picking up from you is that I'm your top pick from scum for OMGUS, because your argument about me not explaining my RVS vote is illogical. So I'm extremely happy with my vote at this point.

don't be a hypocrite. i don't "clearly see" anything. just because i'm not paying attention to your whiny little ass doesn't mean i'm not paying attention.

This does not make sense. Coherent posts please.

As for the requested stance on the Nacho/Ecto argument, I admit I've skimmed through the agument, I'll give it a thorough reread later when I've got a bit more time and then give my stance.

[ConfidAnon]

Pretty much sums it up. Why would you keep your random vote (that you've now talked about random votes have no meaning); instead of voting for somebody obviously scummy? It's a sure sign of scum not wanting to vote for somebody (buddy, town, either way works; initially leaning towards town).

Because my random vote has been given merit by don_johnson's play, and I like where it is right now more so than moving to Nacho.

Like I said in my 120, doing scummy things does not neccessarily make one scum. Townies do scummy things, and right now to me Nacho reads more as scummy town than scummy scum.

Amished . . . what is your opinion of my points on don_johnson (this question goes to everyone as well)?

[ConfidAnon]

@ConfidAnon

What are your points on don johnson? That he questioned the reasoning behind your RVS vote?

Can you give me a quick bullet list of the "scummy things" you have seen from nacho?

Also, why do you say this:

As for the requested stance on the Nacho/Ecto argument, I admit I've skimmed through the agument, I'll give it a thorough reread later when I've got a bit more time and then give my stance.

Which I interpret to mean you haven't really been keeping up with their spat, while you also are speaking definitively about scummy actions from nacho? If you have only skimmed their back and forth, how can you be sure about your reads on those actions being scummy?

don_johnson: I placed my random vote on him, did not give reasoning. He questions me on my motivations behind the vote, and notably does not question the other votes with no reasoning until later on. I noted his OMGUS and asked why he was being so jumpy with one random vote on him. He later voted me saying I was scummy because I did not have reasoning behind my random vote. Smells like a scum overreaction to me.

I play a lot on gut, and right now the only thing scummy I've seen from Nacho is his jumpiness in the early thread. When the argument with Ecto started, I started skimming because I got lazy, so therefore I can not evaluate how Nacho looks coming out of that discussion.

I know I said I'd catch up, but I'm unexpectedly out of the house this evening. I can make this post, and then I gotta go, I'll do it either when I get back or tomorrow, sorry for the delay.

Well if you think people doing scummy things doesn't make them scum, why are you voting for anybody ever? What you did was scummy enough to earn a vote.

Let's see, you have your vote on DJ for being jumpy, but since DJ is more jumpy than nacho, DJ gets scum read and Nacho gets town read? Something like that sum up your position? Yeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaahhhh, not buying it.

Boils down to gut (again, haven't read the Nacho/Ecto argument yet.) I think dj is more likely to be scum than nacho.

why? i never said they did.

Then why did you ask for an explanation for my random vote? You asked me to explain my vote when it was on you when it was clearly random, and then voted me for not justifying my vote. You have clearly implied that random votes require justification, quit dodging the question.

Um, no? If you have a legitimate reason for not liking the wagon, then express it. From where I'm sitting it doesn't look too bad and the cognitive dissonance coming from him is pretty outstanding.

She did give a reason . . . the people she thinks are scum jumped on my wagon.

Its a decent, illogical offence no?

Huh?

[ConfidAnon]

you voted me. i asked why. the other two unexplained random votes came after yours. no reason for me to notice them.

Oh really? Let's look at a few posts, shall we?

Post 24 andPost 26 are both unexplained RVS votes, but you only chose to question the one on you. Seems like a double standard. You only questioned the unexplained RVS vote on yourself, which reads as scum trying to keep votes away from them.

i asked "why?". how is that jumpy? i asked "why?". how is that "omgus"?

Sorry, I blended what happened together here unintentionally. The OMGUS came later on in the thread.

no dodging here. either i have mispoken or you have misunderstood.

first, your vote was not "clearly random". it was a vote alone in space. naked and unabashed. it was hanging in the void. by your own explanation the vote was not truly random either(you had a reason that generated your vote that was not a die roll, number generator, names out of a hat, etc.). you had a reason for it. why were you so against explaining that reason right off? to clarify:

random votes do not need to be explained. however, one should be able to explain them. one should also be willing, as there is no inherent danger or detrimental effect in offering their explanation. in fact, random votes should be the easiest votes for a townie to explain in the game of mafia. the fact that the simple question, "why?", got your panties in such a bunch as to have you morph your rvs vote into a serious vote and avoid answering the simplest of all questions is why i am suspicious of you.

does that clear it up?

A post containing solely a vote in a thread that had currently had only joking votes is not clearly random? I wasn't against explaining my vote . . . I just felt that figuring out why you were so jumpy was a more productive plan of attack.

If random votes do not need to be explained, than why did you ask me to explain mine? Sounds like it's only because it was on you.

And here's another question: What is inherently scummy about not explaining your RVS vote right off?

Catching up on that argument right after lunch. Chicken spaghetti. Yum.

[ConfidAnon]

Post 202: Your questioning of my vote was jumpy because you only questioned my RVS vote on you, not all of the unexplained RVS votes that came before it.

I never said asking questions was scummy. Your jumpiness is.

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

Caught up on the NM/Ecto thing, and my view is the same as before. NM reads town with poor play.

[ConfidAnon]

@Con can you explain further your interpretation of a 'scummy town' vs a 'scummy scum'.

Someone doing a scummy action does not neccessarily make that person scum. Town do scummy things, as do scum. To me, NM reads more as a townie who has done scummy things than actual scum trying to cover for his mistakes. The read can definitely change, but as of right now I think he's town.

[ConfidAnon]

don: Your "why?" post questioned my unexplained RVS vote but ignored the unexplained RVS votes to come before it. THis translates to you being jumpy when voted.

[ConfidAnon]

Geez . . . . that prod was like I was being held at gunpoint. Will catch up shortly.

[ConfidAnon]

or it translates as me responding to you.
you are a stubborn little cuss.

unvote

apparently we are to talk about others now.

but first,

daykill: vi

Geez your stubborn. My points are valid, but I do agree that our back-and-forth should be set aside for other things.

Is that daykill a joke? If it's not, why would you kill her?

And now Vi's wounded . . . that's not good at all, I'm fairly certain she's town. So for that matter . . .

Heal: Vi

Don, you better have some AWESOME reasoning behind that kill. Right now I do not want to see Vi dead, she hasn't done anything scummy imo.

sorry vi. really had no idea that would work. anyhoo, players please realize that vi is dead in 48 hours. their alignment won't be confirmed until then so i suggest holding off on lynching at least until then.

why vi?

vi is one of those players that always reads town imo. only way to know for sure is investigate,vig, etc. but regardless, i really didn't think that was going to work. in regards to not letting me live, daykilling on day one in broad daylight is obviously not scum play. so whatever.

Why wouldn't you think it would work?

I know it's sour grapes to get knocked out of a game early, but dj's right about it being unlikely for scum to daykill like that. Not saying he gets a free pass or anything, but doesn't seem like a scum move to me.

I reluctantly agree.

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

I'm not going to lie, the argument with dj caused me to tunnel a bit. After I get caught up in my other games, I'll give this game a reread and come back with some hopefully better reads on everyone else. And sorry if healing Vi was the wrong move, but to me she seems like the most pro-town player here.

[ConfidAnon]

[quote="Ectomancer, 318"]Confid - seeing as you seem to be a healer and people only have 48 hours before they die, could you not go AWOL again?[/b]

Trust me, not planning on it. SOrry about the AWOL earlier.

[ConfidAnon]

I like the VP case, but the fact that it's coming from benmage makes me skeptical. After all, the case boils down to "When VP's town, (s)he plays awesome. (S)he's not playing so awesome this game. (S)he's scum." It would be a fairly easy case for scum to notice and use to get heat off of them, and benmage did have a decent wagon on him, if I recall.

Also, it would be awesome of pwnz posted more content.

[ConfidAnon]

Go over the reason why its was on me..it was quite crappy.

And look at the pbpa, and the conclusion involving this game alone...ignore the meta crap...i keep saying this!?!??!

I thought the reasons for the wagon were quite valid, actually.

Nacho
He effectively disappeared when the heat came off of him. He still hasn't answered a growing list of questions and I can't figure any proTown motivation for it {though I can think of a few proScum ones}.

This is truth. Nacho come back and scumhunt.

Sure ones allowed to change their mind...You may dislike Amish for whatever reason, i dont think you've really illustrated why.

Because the buddying thing is weak as hell.. Ok he buddy's me, fine you can dislike that.

But I, Vi, him... all were like 'awesome' when Con healed..so how can you hate on someone buddyin a doc?? doesnt make sense.

And you ignore VPB who appeared to be buddyin you(so this cant be a vendetta against "buddying")...soo not blind, interesting...alternative motive perhaps..idno, but definitely interesting.

1. I'm not a doc.

2. The last segment of this post bothers me. Someone calls Sotty town . . . so you find a point on Sotty. You didn't call it scumy, but interesting. This reads to me like your trying to keep as many people from looking town as possible to increase the chances of a mislynch.

[ConfidAnon]

Benmage

- This post and the one to follow, where you read me in iso and said there was nothing wrong. Then you read each player's reasons for voting for me . . . they were all the same, and stemmed basically from one line that I would have said. You found those reasons compelling enough to vote me, and yet you didn't when you read me in iso.

VP's 367

- VERY good post . . . makes me want to vote Benmage . . . but I'll wait and see what the vote count is until I do so. Don't want to hastily hammer.

I have some other stuff to comment on here sometime today, but I had a major realization this morning about Amished. I don't have plans to reveal it at this time, but I'll just say that I'm not down for his lynch. I can see where people are coming from, but I think it's the wrong course of action at the moment. I also used my current reads for some personal PoE and I've come to the conclusion that we need to be lynching in the following group to hit scum:

benmage
Porkchop
ectomancer
pwnz

Out of those, benmage is still my top pick, but I would definitely back an ectomancer lynch if there is interest. Yeah yeah, what's the case you say. I'll get to that today hopefully (after I catch up in yet another game I'm seriously behind in), but just thought I would put those thoughts out there for now.

I can reveal my PoE if a majority of people are interested, but I will ONLY do that if it is a majority thing.

I agree with this list. Two things: 1. What does PoE stand for? (Not asking you to reveal what yours is, just don't get the acronym.) 2.

Could we get a vote count?

[ConfidAnon]

PoE is Process of Elimination.

Vote count looks like this.

Thanks.

Unvote, Vote: Benmage

Benmage - You being persuaded by Amished's point would be fine if I didn't have points on don_johnson at the time.

Clearly you didnt understand post 360, nor bother to read 370...But hell i'll indulge you...What about 367 stuck out as particularly good, suddenly so convincing you want to vote me?

Yea, I've read the thread. 360 doesn't do anything for me. Coasting is just as much a scumtell as it is a lazy towntell. *waits for ben to bring up meta* And meta on it's own isn't a case.

Also, as a side note about your behavior towards my wagon: You keep telling people to read the thread, but you didn't see Amished's post until you did an iso of the people voting me? Hypocritical, much?

367 is good because of the part under the last quote. THe points about you wanting VP lynched even if she's town ("I dont care if you act scummy as town, all the more reason to lynch you."), and you tunneling on VP for coasting when there's at least one other coaster out there.

*messes up the vote count*

Unvote: Amished
Vote: Ectomancer (L-4)

Any particular reason for changing back and forth between these two?

[ConfidAnon]

which points on don?

1. Jumpy. 2. OMGUS

Not that strong of a case, but for the early game when it cropped up, it was good.

I brought up meta...you playing this game?

Nope, not at all. I'm just here, responding to your posts, but I have no interest at all in playing this game.

Nope. I dont make declarative statements without reading the thread. If anything i keep saying how i need to reread the thread, or certain issues.

Conculsion: ur bad.

That wasn't meant to call you scummy . . . just something I found humorous.

I dont get this..unless you are referring to my desire to lynch her scummy behavior..if she flips town than it is what it is...but i cant excuse her scummy behavior, and let her slide bye.

If you don't get it, then you obviously haven't read the thread. You said, and I quote, "I dont care if you act scummy as town, all the more reason to lynch you." Justification of a townie lynch is scummy. VP's other points at the bottom of 367 are valid as well.

@Everyone..am I getting frustrated over nothing?? I mean is Con as bad a player as i interpret him or am I being bias....

I mean 381 alone is a dumb question which i answered which i re-answer through my own iso on statements i've already said.

His last post is just as bad.

Maybe i'm being too critical......but i reheallly dont think so.

Is this supposed to get me to shut up?

Maybe I am as bad of a player as you interpret, but I'm not going to stop trying.

[ConfidAnon]

Bah, I (and we) need the answer to this for a couple reasons anyhow.

shoot Vi

Geez Vi is hated . . . and do you have reasons?

Sorry, can't comment much today, not much time.

[ConfidAnon]

Sorry for the lack of content . . . . should be able to get caught up later tonight.

[ConfidAnon]

Caught up, but to be honest, I'm having troubles getting into gear for this game, so to speak.

Vi's flip should be interesting, but it makes me pretty ticked seeing as I revealed myself only to have her shot again.

don_johnson: Play better. Kthnx.

Anyways, I'll wait to vote after the day actions resolve.