Mafia 39: Back to Gambits - Game over!

dybeck · Post Post #5 (isolation #0) » Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:26 pm

/conform.

dybeck · Post Post #31 (isolation #1) » Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:40 pm

Afraid of LoudmouthLee... that rules me out then

First 'random'

vote: Puzzle

, my great and worthy opponent.

dybeck · Post Post #34 (isolation #2) » Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:30 pm

Puzzle wrote:Where is the love ?

xx

dybeck · Post Post #67 (isolation #3) » Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:57 pm

Much as I don't want this to become Dybeck vs jeep, a post that amounts to 'anyone who votes for me is scum' can't be described as anything but scummy.

FOS: jeep

dybeck · Post Post #72 (isolation #4) » Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:54 pm

jeep wrote:Actually, without the comment, it's not really a big deal. With the comment, his vote for me makes zero sense. You can chalk my vote up to OMGUS, if you want, but it's not.

That's a deliberate misinterpretation of what I said. I never said that your vote was OMGUS, or that your vote was motivated by spite in any sense.

Your vote was a calculated attempt to start a bandwagon (you said this explicitly), which simultaneously made people scared to vote for you.

Quit twisting my words!

dybeck · Post Post #80 (isolation #5) » Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:57 am

There's no way we should lynch BabyJesus just because of his reputation as a Day 1 lynch.

If we're going to lynch him, it should be for all the reasons we usually lynch him.

dybeck · Post Post #102 (isolation #6) » Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:14 pm

jeep wrote:
dybeck
: What do YOU think an OMGUS vote is? I don't think I ever twisted your words, and if I did so, it was an honest misunderstanding of what you said.

I've always understood an OMGUS vote to be voting purely (or mostly) because one is angry, or spiteful, that they have been voted for by another - especially if they see no good reason for it.

Your vote didn't seem to be motivated by anger or spite, but you claimed to have deduced that, logically, a vote for you was a scummy thing to do.

The end result in terms of votes is the same - a vote each. However, it's more malicious than an OMGUS vote. Your claim that it was logically motivated, rather than spiteful, was intended to encourage others to follow your bandwagon. And that struck me as scummy.

dybeck · Post Post #106 (isolation #7) » Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:21 am

I get the impression that whoever we lynch tonight, we're going to be able to tell a lot from voting patterns here.

dybeck · Post Post #145 (isolation #8) » Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:38 am

What's the deal with the StD bandwagon??

I don't think I get it.

Thesp wrote:Clarification: dybeck hasn't offered up a significant vote.

An oversight.

vote: Jeep

.

You will, eventually, realise that I'm right about this.

dybeck · Post Post #206 (isolation #9) » Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:33 pm

Wow sweet mother of christ.

I get tonsillitis and when I come back suddenly i'm two from lynch?

What did I do in that time?

In fact, what did I do in the first place again?

I just pointed out why I thought Jeep was scummy. I knew it was a dangerous thing to do, and I knew it was going to draw attention to me. Trust me, when I'm scum, those are the last two things I do.

How on earth am I the best choice for a lynch??

dybeck · Post Post #211 (isolation #10) » Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:23 am

Astronaut: I'm not saying I'm cleverer than the rest of you, but I am convinced Jeep's scum. I guess i just wanted to get an 'I told you so' in now, since it looks unlikely anyone's gonna pay any attention to me.

SpeedyKQ: I was just observing that people at the time were very clear on which side of the bandwagon they were on, and that there was potentially a lot of information that could help us out later, once we've established who's guilty and who's not.

As for my comment about the StD bandwagon - I stand by it completely. There was absolutely nothing to convict him on, yet you nearly lynched him. The speed with which the lynch built was like nothing I've ever seen before! You guys went crazy for a minute there! Reread it and you'll see what I mean.

dybeck · Post Post #235 (isolation #11) » Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:15 pm

Since I'm dead anyway - you may as well know that I was the Sorcerer.

dybeck · Post Post #242 (isolation #12) » Fri Aug 05, 2005 1:20 am

I don't think we should get everyone to vote - but I'd sure be interested to know what jeep has in the way of a claim.

dybeck · Post Post #243 (isolation #13) » Fri Aug 05, 2005 1:33 am

dybeck wrote:I don't think we should get everyone to vote - but I'd sure be interested to know what jeep has in the way of a claim.

The word

vote

should be the word

claim

- sorry!

dybeck · Post Post #297 (isolation #14) » Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:53 pm

Did anyone think that maybe it'd be smart to have REASONS to lynch people?

Or are we just going to go through the game bandwagoning people randomly?

dybeck · Post Post #370 (isolation #15) » Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:24 pm

Is there anyone else not happy with any of these bandwagons?

It just feels to me like we're going wagon-claim-wagon on four probable pro-town players

There are still a bunch of lurkers to be heard from - I'd love to see some substantive posts from people like MoS and Pooky.

dybeck · Post Post #373 (isolation #16) » Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:13 am

Puzzle wrote:Finally, can you explain why you perceive Hezlucky or BabyJesus as pro-town ?

As far as BabyJesus is concerned, his point is that he offered to get himself lynched to get someone else resurrected is valid. It's a particularly pro-town thing to do, and at this stage in the game it wouldn't make any sense to do this even if he was a Judas, Saulus or vampire, since I can't see why a change of alignment would be favorable either way. His attitude today is also exactly true to form in terms of the way a pro-town BabyJesus plays.

As for HezLucky, he's contributing well and he seems to be raising valid points that are likely to contribute to finding scum. I don't have a particularly strong sense either way on him, but I'm more suspicious of those who hide than those who contribute positively.

I understand that people get tired of long Day 1s. But they make town win games. If everyone contributes, we can tell so much from the way people vote and the way they side on bandwagons that it makes it so much easier to catch scum later in the game. A hurried lynch day 1 leads to thrashing around in the dark on day 2, and more often than not, another blind lynch.

That's my two-cents worth.

dybeck · Post Post #460 (isolation #17) » Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:16 pm

I'm on board with the vikingfan wagon.

I think he's scum with Jeep.

unvote Jeep, vote: vikingfan

dybeck · Post Post #464 (isolation #18) » Mon Aug 15, 2005 1:11 am

dybeck wrote:I'm on board with the vikingfan wagon.

I think he's scum with Jeep.

and, apparently, Thoth.

dybeck · Post Post #479 (isolation #19) » Thu Aug 18, 2005 5:17 am

Jeep seemed like such an obvious mafia hit last night. The fact that the archangel didn't protect him makes me think the archangel is probably dead.

What do others think?

dybeck · Post Post #506 (isolation #20) » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:43 pm

Thesp wrote:Seriously, do you think discussion like this would be helpful to anyone but the scum right now? Really?

Vote: dybeck.

If I'd been scum... wouldn't I just discuss it in private? I was just making the point that if I'm right, and you kill me tonight, only the bookie will be able to do resurrections. It'd probably be smart to discuss this before going to a lynch - especially if it's going to be me.

dybeck · Post Post #507 (isolation #21) » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:46 pm

As in... discuss a resurrection strategy... not discuss the lynch - that seems to have been decided already... I can see the pitchforks and flaming torches from here

dybeck · Post Post #508 (isolation #22) » Thu Aug 18, 2005 10:48 pm

Oh... and sorry for triple post...

But can the mod fix the tags in my last-but-one post?

The vote for me should be part of the QUOTE - not a vote for myself!