Mini 904 - Narnia: LWW Mafia (Game Over)

[Sibelius]

Grrrrrrr double post.

[dybeck]

Wolf, are you really FOS-ing me for trying to halt a quicklynch of a person on page 2?

Seriously - you need to stop making like there was ever a danger of a quicklynch. L-3 on Page 2 has never, ever led to a quicklynch in the history of mafia.

You may think you're showing yourself to be the saviour of the town, but you're just misrepresenting this entire situation and it's creating a sideshow.

[Starbuck]

Also... L-3 is MILES from a lynch. I'd be exceptionally comfortable with seeing three more people pile on to this wagon to get a hugely early Day 1 lynch because we could be fairly certain that these hypothetical quicklynchers were scum.

And finding 3 scum on page 2 can't be a bad thing.

L-7, L-6, L-5 are miles from a lynch, not L-3.

Are you seriously pushing for a quicklynch?

Seriously - you need to stop making like there was ever a danger of a quicklynch. L-3 on Page 2 has never, ever led to a quicklynch in the history of mafia.

You may think you're showing yourself to be the saviour of the town, but you're just misrepresenting this entire situation and it's creating a sideshow.

Wait, how did I misrepresent you again?

That's quite a strong accusation to say that I'm "showing myself to be the saviour of the town". Anything to back that up?

FOS: dybeck

[wolframnhart]

There was never any danger of a quick lynch Starbuck. Had Kiku gotten two more votes right after J.R. voted and gotten to L-1 I could see the danger in a quick lynch, but you overreacted to an L-3 situation. In RVS stage wagons form I would guess almost all the time, maybe even to L-1, so yes I FoSed you because it is note worthy, not vote worthy.

[manho]

L-3 is miles from a lynch, L-1 is close. and a quick bandwagon is the most useful way to get out of RVS, at least in the games i'm in.

[manho]

L-3 is miles from a lynch, L-1 is close. and a quick bandwagon is the most useful way to get out of RVS, at least in the games i'm in.

[dybeck]

Also... L-3 is MILES from a lynch. I'd be exceptionally comfortable with seeing three more people pile on to this wagon to get a hugely early Day 1 lynch because we could be fairly certain that these hypothetical quicklynchers were scum.

And finding 3 scum on page 2 can't be a bad thing.

L-7, L-6, L-5 are miles from a lynch, not L-3.

Are you seriously pushing for a quicklynch?

I'll chalk your idea that L-3 is next best thing to lynch down to in experience. However, to say that I'm pushing for a quicklynch is GROSS misrepresentation, when it's very clear that this isn't the case.

Seriously - you need to stop making like there was ever a danger of a quicklynch. L-3 on Page 2 has never, ever led to a quicklynch in the history of mafia.

You may think you're showing yourself to be the saviour of the town, but you're just misrepresenting this entire situation and it's creating a sideshow.

Wait, how did I misrepresent you again?

That's quite a strong accusation to say that I'm "showing myself to be the saviour of the town". Anything to back that up?

FOS: dybeck

Again, just plain twisiting the situation. I've never once said you're misrepresenting me. My accusation is that you are making out that a mini-bandwagon is somehow scummy and that it is in danger of bringing the town close to lynch, when it's doing nothing of the sort.

This could all just be lack of experience, but you're twisting my words and those of others and I don't like it.

unvote, vote: Starbuck

Starbuck, how many mafia games have you played prior to this one?

[Papa Zito]

You may think you're showing yourself to be the saviour of the town, but you're just misrepresenting this entire situation and it's creating a sideshow.

However, to say that I'm pushing for a quicklynch is GROSS misrepresentation, when it's very clear that this isn't the case.

I've never once said you're misrepresenting me.

lolwut

[dybeck]

You may think you're showing yourself to be the saviour of the town, but you're just misrepresenting this entire situation and it's creating a sideshow.

However, to say that I'm pushing for a quicklynch is GROSS misrepresentation, when it's very clear that this isn't the case.

I've never once said you're misrepresenting me.

lolwut

LOL

That should probably be:

I've never once

prior to post 52 (in which you make the accusation)

said you're misrepresenting me.

Post 52 constituted Starbuck's first misrepresentation of

my

words - up to that point it had only been misrepresenting the general game state.

Sorry... that should have been clearer

[Kdub]

Vote Count

Starbuck (1)

- dybeck

Riceballtail (0)

-

bv310 (1)

- manho

MadCrawdad (0)

-

kikuchiyo (1)

- J.R

Heilograph (2)

- Papa Zito, MadCrawdad

Papa Zito (1)

- Heilograph

wolframnhart (1)

- Riceballtail

J.R (2)

- wolframnhart, Starbuck

manho (1)

- bv310

dybeck (1)

- kikuchiyo

Sibelius (0)

-

No Lynch (0)

-

Not Voting (1)

- Sibelius

12 votes available, 7 votes needed to lynch.

Deadline is January 26, ~ 12:30 am MST.

[Papa Zito]

Groovie. I'm with you that Starbuck is playing the White Knight card, which is worse than Heilograph's blatant OMGUS vote.

unvote: Heilograph
vote: Starbuck

BTW

J.R., why would you put kiku at L-3 this early? A quick-wagon is not the best way to start this day.

Came right after Starbuck's post/vote.

[Riceballtail]

L-3 is miles from a lynch, L-1 is close. and a quick bandwagon is the most useful way to get out of RVS, at least in the games i'm in.

Yeah, I don't agree that a quick wagon is the best way to get out of RVS, but it is a way that works. You can generally get a look from how some people vote (wagon or not) and their reasoning as well.

[Starbuck]

@dybeck - Just how am I misrepresenting you? You still haven't answered that question.

Also, how am I twisting words?

You are saying I'm doing all of this and not providing ANY kinds of EXAMPLES.


Every single mafia game that I've played on this site is in my Wiki and I'm probably close to or over 30 by now.

[Starbuck]

I'm really not playing the White Knight card, and I find it to be hypocritical of both of you to be voting for me because I was trying to halt a quicklynch. I don't understand how that is scummy.

[Papa Zito]

I'm really not playing the White Knight card, and I find it to be hypocritical of both of you to be voting for me because I was trying to halt a quicklynch. I don't understand how that is scummy.

Well.

1. We were never in danger of a quicklynch. 7 votes in the first few pages of Day 1? Plz.
2. Anyone who quickhammered would be instantly outted as scum. 1-1 ratios are good ratios for the town. If scum were dumb enough to quicklynch, you should let them do it.

So to me, you're trying to make it sound like there was HUGE IMMINENT DANGER WOOPWOOPWOOP when there wasn't, but thank God Starbuck is here to prevent us from making the Big Mistake. There's no townie rationale for your behavior, but there is a scum one.

[MadCrawdad]

I'm really not playing the White Knight card, and I find it to be hypocritical of both of you to be voting for me because I was trying to halt a quicklynch. I don't understand how that is scummy.

The issue is your use of the word

halt

. Claiming that you

halted

a quick-lynch implies that one would have happened had you not acted. That's quite likely not the case.

While unvoting may have

prevented

any quick-lynch from occurring, it didn't necessarily

halt

one. Claiming that unvoting halted a quick-lynch IS a misrepresentation.

@bv310

What are your thoughts on the discussion between Starbuck and Dybeck (and others) regarding whether Starbuck halted a quick-lynch?

[J.R]

I don't really get how you felt uncomfortable when I put kikuchiyo on that position. That's only the third vote against him. It is

less likely

to happen that there would be 4 players who would just immediately jump on that bandwagon and make the quick lynch at this point of the game.

I just stated that it's great to start with a bandwagon and voted for the player who has the most votes to get reactions on players.

Unvote

Vote: Starbuck

I've just realized how hectic my schedule is. I will have less posts during weekdays but I'll be

more

active during weekends

[kikuchiyo]

Last time I played with Starbuck I thought her AtE's were scummy, but unless she is putting it on to build meta(in which case its null), I find it to be more of a town tell. Either way, its not a scumtell.

Unvote

Bye bye RVS.

[Sibelius]

I don't buy the case against Starbuck. Though I agree that L-3 on page 2 wasn't significant, I think Starbuck's action is being blown out of proportion.

MadCrawdad, post 65: I don't care for your arguing of semantics. Like everything else against Starbuck, this is making a mountain out of a molehill.

PapaZito: Your last post is the clearest example of your reading too much into things. The way you were on Heilograph earlier and the way you're going after Starbuck doesn't sit well with me.

bv310, Riceballtail, manho: We don't have much game material yet, but I noticed most or all of your posts are non-committal restatements of other people's thoughts. Make your own observations of what's been going on and please post them for us in your own words.

Vote: PapaZito

[bv310]

@bv310

What are your thoughts on the discussion between Starbuck and Dybeck (and others) regarding whether Starbuck halted a quick-lynch?

At this point, I think the whole action is being taken way too seriously. I don't like how there was a stated wagon this early in RVS, but that's just playstyle I guess.

Sibelius, so far my attention has gone towards the lurkers, rather than the players. Honestly, the people posting frequently so far have been relatively good with their styles, and although I did find Starbuck suspicious before, I find the quick L-3 move less odd now.

If I can get on tomorrow, I'll try to read a bit more and come up with a real case.

[Starbuck]

Last time I played with Starbuck I thought her AtE's were scummy, but unless she is putting it on to build meta(in which case its null), I find it to be more of a town tell. Either way, its not a scumtell.

Can you show me where in this game that I've used AtE?

Because I assure you, I have not.

[Papa Zito]

PapaZito: Your last post is the clearest example of your reading too much into things. The way you were on Heilograph earlier and the way you're going after Starbuck doesn't sit well with me.

Was there a sale on chainsaws at Home Depot? I must have missed it.

kikuchiyo's post made no sense.

[MadCrawdad]

MadCrawdad, post 65: I don't care for your arguing of semantics. Like everything else against Starbuck, this is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Then think of it as a clarification, because I'm not arguing semantics.

Honestly, the people posting frequently so far have been relatively good with their styles, and although I did find Starbuck suspicious before, I find the quick L-3 move less odd now.

When did you find Starbuck suspicious? Initially you agreed with her.

Regarding the quick L-3 move, what would you say changed your mind?

---------

As a side note, I'll be V/LA through the weekend.

[kikuchiyo]

Sorry, Starbuck, rereading and I realize you're not using AtE. What I am referring to is the emotional tone I am reading in your posts. The "Why are you suspicious of me?" attitude. Your posts sound alot like our game where we went at it over role pms. Null tell for me at best. Though I don't think L-3 is dangerous in RVS, I agree that you overreacted a bit. To me, that's an emotional move. The only other explanation is scum motivation. But I don't see it.

bv310 post 69 is good. We shouldn't let inactives slide by. If I remember correctly, RBT is going to lurk regardless of alignment. I'll start by asking for some more content from that slot before I vote.

[Starbuck]

I don't feel I have a "Why are you suspicious of me?" tone. I was asking questions and trying to spur discussion.

Also, trying to prevent yourself from being quicklynched. L-3 on page two is a bit much when there are 11 other players for people to pick from to RVS vote on.