Mafia 121 -- Picking Simplicity Game Over

[Empking]

/confirm

[Empking]

Vote: Lowell

For voting Glork.

[Empking]

OK, I'm pretty sure that was an awful idea plus I don't even think that it can kickstart discussion.

FOS; Jack

- Honestly I don't think I buy it (Don't think he should be today's lynch though.)

[Empking]

OK, I'm pretty sure that was an awful idea plus I don't even think that it can kickstart discussion.

FOS; Jack

- Honestly I don't think I buy it (Don't think he should be today's lynch though.)

Do you think this makes sense as a scum gambit?

Honestly, yes. It won't last him to the end of the game of course but it would make him NK-Immune for a couple of days and allow him to lead the town until one of the real power roles kicked the bucket (and even then it would get the real role to come out and die before the next day.)

[Empking]

Thinking about it for a while, I think Glork's right. At the very least its better than nothing.

Unvote

Vote: LMP

[Empking]

Vote: -Empking.

Would any of you mind if I talked like t)(is wit)( t)(e )(s for t)(e rest of t)(e game?

Glork: If you're town, do you think it was a good idea to go around telling everyone what a great idea it would be for scum to shoot Jack tonight?

I think that the scums are just as capable as anybody else at figuring out whether it's in their interests to shoot at Jack or not.

Not posting it doesn't mean that nobody else is thinking it. Don't even try this sort of non-logic with me.


That said, thank you for outing yourself as LMP's scumbuddy.

That's awesome. If you disagree with Glork you must be scum.

You can't deny can you that Nikanor is one of the scummier players can you?

[Empking]

Oh, bugger I was just following Glork eh...

1. His non-direct attacks against Glork.
2. His silliness on page 4.
3. His ignoring of your own posts.

[Empking]

Oh, bugger I was just following Glork eh...

1. His non-direct attacks against Glork.
2. His silliness on page 4.
3. His ignoring of your own posts.

1. Challenging something incorrect that Glork said is a non-direct attack?
2. The game is on page 3. I CAN HAZ UR TIME MACHINE?
3. Not particularly sure why this is scummy.

1. "if your town" - with the implication (I thought) that's not town.
2. Page three then.
3. Because you're the scummiest player so it looks like he's trying to avoid a connection.

[Empking]

Oh, bugger I was just following Glork eh...

1. His non-direct attacks against Glork.
2. His silliness on page 4.
3. His ignoring of your own posts.

1. Challenging something incorrect that Glork said is a non-direct attack?
2. The game is on page 3. I CAN HAZ UR TIME MACHINE?
3. Not particularly sure why this is scummy.

1. "if your town" - with the implication (I thought) that's not town.
2. Page three then.
3. Because you're the scummiest player so it looks like he's trying to avoid a connection.

EBWOP: "If you're town"

[Empking]

@Empking: What is scummy about Nikanor's sillyness on page

4

3?

Its distractingly silly (do you mind if I use )( instead of "h") and why would town want to be distracting?

[Empking]

@Empking: What is scummy about Nikanor's sillyness on page

4

3?

Its distractingly silly (do you mind if I use )( instead of "h") and why would town want to be distracting?

What do you think about posts 75 and 77? :p

I'm not opposed to humour as I think it encourages proper activity. It the stupid non-sequitors that I dislike.

[Empking]

You think Nikanor doing )( instead of H makes Nikanor more likely to be scum, because it is a non-sequitor? Am I interpreting this right?

Yes to be quite honest.

[Empking]

So is it still a non-sequitor given this earlier in the thread:

Wood evry1 b pissed if I typed liek this all game long?

Don't you think that inspired Nikanor's )( joke?

I'd say a response to a non-sequitor is essentially a non-sequitor in itself.

LMP: What are you trying to do with this discussion?

[Empking]

3. Because you're the scummiest player so it looks like he's trying to avoid a connection.

LMP had only made a few posts by this point, and none of them looked especially scummy to me. Want to explain yourself, empking?
.

I'm not certain what you're asking but...
1. There's a reason that point was last.
2. LMP liked Jack's claim. Town was like "Ugh" but LMP had to guess as to the feelings of the town with nothing to go on (he posted first) and he guessed completely wrong.

[Empking]

Nik
1. No it wasn't! Yes it was! No it wasn't! Yes it was!
2. No it wasn't! Yes it was! No it wasn't! Yes it was!
3. I've already said what I consider the big slip at the time was.

[Empking]

I like Jack's claim.

FoS: Yos

For saying something that obviously an untruth.

[Empking]

I like Jack's claim.

FoS: Yos

For saying something that obviously an untruth.

Yeah, yeah. I had forgotten about that line, actually.

But the actual point of my post, that you for some reason completly ignored, was that LMP's real argument was:

Do you think this makes sense as a scum gambit?

Was a strong, logical argument, it made sense in context, and it's probably correct. Beyond that, it has what look to be good, pro-town motives behind it, and I think LMP is probably town based on this. I find the actual attacks on Jack, especially your fos of him, a lot more iffy then anything lmp said.

Again, of course Jack's play here was really bad, but that's not the issue here.

I presumed the actual point of your point was to disagree with me about LMP being scummy or at least comitting a scummy action.

I still say that Jack is probably scum.

[Empking]

I still say that Jack is probably scum.

Explain this to me, then.

With his claim, if Jack is scum, he's doomed himself, for little to no apparent gain. There are exactally two power roles in this game, they will eventually both either claim or be nightkilled for one reason or another, and if that happens and Jack is not one of them, he's dead.

I mean, I could see a really desprate, gambiting scum deciding to claim doc right away on day 1 if he thought it was worth it to sacrifice himself in order to get the real doc to counterclaim, that's a theoretically possible move, but Jack's claim doesn't even do that.

There's almost no chance Jack is scum here, and if he is, then we'll find out anyway. Your claimed suspicions on him here are just making me increasingly suspicious of you.

Wow the player who's lying and defending LMP is trying to threaten me out of my suspicions of Jack. God, I'm afraid.

Jack has the benefit of outing the power roles in (what's probably) the near future. In the mean time he may have been planning at looking really pro-town in order to lead the town along with getting the doc to protect a scumbag and off a townie. Its a suicide mission but one that clearly has large gains for scum.

[Empking]

Wow the player who's lying and defending LMP is trying to threaten me out of my suspicions of Jack. God, I'm afraid.

Vote:Empking

Yeah, not buying the "Ooohh, I'm sooo scared" act. You're scum, aren't you? Probably scum who's hoping for a chance to lynch a town power role today; you're not going to take the risk of really pushing the Jack wagon, but you're making sure you can get on it if it looks like it might go somewhere.

Plus, the way you're throwing around the word "lying" here in a situation where it clearly dosn't apply feels like a scummy diversion attempt,

LMP: I like the claim.
Me: LMP says he liked the claim.
Yos: No he didn't.
That's a pretty clear cut lie.

as is you trying to sound like me "defending LMP" is somehow a strike against me.

The fact that you're defending scum while at the same time attacking (one of) his most vocal attacker is a strike against you. Your acting like somebody who knows they're on LMP's team.

Jack has the benefit of outing the power roles in (what's probably) the near future.

Bull.

No town role is going to claim in order to counter a "I'm either a doc or a cop" claim. Sure, at some point in the future, if, for example, a doc claims, the cop would know that either the doc or Jack is lying, but he still wouldn't counterclaim; he's investigate and figure out which one is lying.

And the cop claims. Outing one of our power roles in the near future.

The odds of Jack's claim outing any town power roles in the immedeate future are pretty low.

Unless of course we follow your train of thought to its logical conclusion.

In the mean time he may have been planning at looking really pro-town in order to lead the town along with getting the doc to protect a scumbag and off a townie. Its a suicide mission but one that clearly has large gains for scum.

Pffft.

If he's lying scum, all he did was attract a ton of attention to himself early on day 1 for no reason, increase the odds a cop investigates him, guarantee his eventual doom, and he dosn't get anything out of it. Why would you think that would let him "lead the town"? Town or not, who the hell would blindly follow him after a boneheaded move like that day 1 claim?

Boneheaded people especially when his scumbuddies are supporting his claim.

[Empking]

Empking doesn't know what a lie is

My dictionary says something meant to deceive. Like trying to cover for your scumbuddy and hoping nobody checks.

And also in your "jack is scum/doc dies/the cop claims scenario" your forgetting that the cop wouldn't claim because he would be confidant in my lynch if he got night killed.

Then why is the cop wasting an investigation on you?

[Empking]

Empking doesn't know what a lie is

My dictionary says something meant to deceive. Like trying to cover for your scumbuddy and hoping nobody checks.

And yos meant to deceive how? He hoped nobody would check, that's your claim?

You said it was a clear cut lie. But that is not true, it is an obvious

falsehood

. So your claim was false, and if you meant and understood it, you were lying.

You noticed it was a falsehood and didn't say anything about it? Why?

And also in your "jack is scum/doc dies/the cop claims scenario" your forgetting that the cop wouldn't claim because he would be confidant in my lynch if he got night killed.

Then why is the cop wasting an investigation on you?

Why indeed, he wouldn't bother. Are you going to admit you were wrong?[/quote]

I wasn't wrong. I was extrapolating from Yos's principles in order 9on the off chance thart he is town) to convince him that he was wrong.

[Empking]

LMP: I like the claim.
Me: LMP says he liked the claim.
Yos: No he didn't.
That's a pretty clear cut lie.

Are you scum, or are you just delibratly being obtuse?

Essentially we have two choices.
1. You forgot about LMP's post and you're scum protecting another player.

OR

2. You're scum protecting another player.

Occam's razor suggests two is the correct answer.

as is you trying to sound like me "defending LMP" is somehow a strike against me.

The fact that you're defending scum while at the same time attacking (one of) his most vocal attacker is a strike against you.

If LMP flips scum, then yes, me defending him would be a rational argument against me.

What you're doing now, though, is just terrible. You made a bad argument against someone who looks mildly townish to me so far, I called you out on it, and now you're trying to say I'm "defending scum".

If you think LMP is scum, make a real case for it, try to get him lynched. If you get him lynched, and he flips scum, then you can try to look for connections. That's not what you're doing right now. What you're doing right now seems to be assuming that your horrible and illogical case is right for no apparent reason and then attacking anyone who disagrees with you by saying they're "defending scum".

You're lying to defend LMP and your chainsawing to protect LMP. At least half your actions in this game have been indirect defense and spreading falsehoods to protect LMP. There's a connection and I'm not going to forget about that if it turns out that you were just buddying LMP.

Your acting like somebody who knows they're on LMP's team.

So, if I see you try to make a bullshit attack on Jack, and then you follow it up by attacking LMP for pointing out that your attack was bullshit, I shouldn't dare question your moves, because I would only do that if I "knew what team LMP is on"? Is that really the argument you're trying to make here? Because I'm pretty sure that's not how mafia is played.

Again, you post about my "attack" on Jack after I FoS you and after you lie in order to help defend LMP.

And the cop claims. Outing one of our power roles in the near future.

So, now you're worried about the cop claiming on like day 3 or 4 with several results at least one guilty? The cop SHOULD usually claim in that kind of situation. You're not making sense.

Why is the cop investigating Jack when he could just come up with one more innocent and still reveal Jack as scum (by getting the doctor to claim).

Boneheaded people especially when his scumbuddies are supporting his claim.

And it looks like you're pretty much just going to try to ignore everything I say by calling me, and anyone who disagrees with you, scum, and saying that they must be scum because they disagree with you, right? Yeah, that's a pretty standard scum tactic.

Seriously, I FoS a page ago and now I'm suddenly calling you scum because you disagree with me.

Jack; Can I at least call that a lie?

[Empking]

LMP: I like the claim.
Me: LMP says he liked the claim.
Yos: No he didn't.
That's a pretty clear cut lie.

Are you scum, or are you just delibratly being obtuse?

Essentially we have two choices.
1. You forgot about LMP's post and you're scum protecting another player.

OR

2. You're scum protecting another player.

...dude, what kind of drugs are you on?

Essentially, we have one choices.

1. I forgot about that line in LMP's post, and wasn't thinking about it when I responded to you. Also, I still don't really think it's important, since the relevent post is the one where he explained himself, and you're still avoiding actually talking about the relevent stuff by pretending me forgetting one line is some kind of huge proof of conspiracy.

Nothing else makes sense. I don't even begin to understand how you can take that and assume I'm "protecting" someone.

It could be that there are a bunch of explainations for your scummy defense of LMP that are all perfectly innocent. But its much more likely that you're scum.

as is you trying to sound like me "defending LMP" is somehow a strike against me.

The fact that you're defending scum while at the same time attacking (one of) his most vocal attacker is a strike against you.

If LMP flips scum, then yes, me defending him would be a rational argument against me.

What you're doing now, though, is just terrible. You made a bad argument against someone who looks mildly townish to me so far, I called you out on it, and now you're trying to say I'm "defending scum".

If you think LMP is scum, make a real case for it, try to get him lynched. If you get him lynched, and he flips scum, then you can try to look for connections. That's not what you're doing right now. What you're doing right now seems to be assuming that your horrible and illogical case is right for no apparent reason and then attacking anyone who disagrees with you by saying they're "defending scum".

You're lying to defend LMP and your chainsawing to protect LMP. At least half your actions in this game have been indirect defense and spreading falsehoods to protect LMP. There's a connection and I'm not going to forget about that if it turns out that you were just buddying LMP.

Also, I like what you're doing here. If I defend someone and they're scum, I'm "chainsawing". If I defend someone and they're town, I'm "buddying".

Wow is almost as if expending all your energy in defending somebody is scummy regardless of the other person's alignment isn't it?

Why is the cop investigating Jack when he could just come up with one more innocent and still reveal Jack as scum (by getting the doctor to claim).

You're right, the cop shouldn't investigate Jack, and the doc shouldn't claim to reveal Jack as scum. THIS IS WHY JACK'S PLAY MAKES NO SENSE AS SCUM. You're proving the EXACT point I was trying to make all along, at the same time you're calling me scum for making it.

increase the odds a cop investigates him

Contradicting yourself now.

Boneheaded people especially when his scumbuddies are supporting his claim.

And it looks like you're pretty much just going to try to ignore everything I say by calling me, and anyone who disagrees with you, scum, and saying that they must be scum because they disagree with you, right? Yeah, that's a pretty standard scum tactic.

[/quote]

I'm not saying your scum because you disagree with me, plenty of players disagree with me. I'm calling you scum because of your defending of LMP and your ways of going about it.

"Suddenly?" You FOS'd me becasue I disagreed with you about LMP, right?

Are you calling the LMP "like" thing a disagreement because even Jack admitted that was a falsehood.

[Empking]

That like thing is not irrelevant because you're arguing that I don't haver a case on LMP and that onbly makes sense if you were right about the like thing and you weren't.

(Compare
Empking: LMP is scum because he's reacting in a manner completely conflicting with how town would ract.
Yos: No he didn't.
Empking: Bugger, I have no case
Yos: You have no case.

with

Empking: LMPis scum because he's reacting in a manner completely conflicting with how town would ract.
Yos: No he didn't.
Empking: Yes he did *provides quote*
Yos: You have no case.)

Also, sleeping on it, Yos agreed with my quote (which was devoid of context and used pretty much the same words we were using) far too quickly for somebody who didn't know about the line.

eld: If the meta is that scum don't make easily checked upon lies then scum will realize that and then make easily checkable lies. (After all, he lied and nobody but myself thinks him any scummier for it.)

[Empking]

There is a difference between a Lie, and, being Wrong. You, Empking, are refusing to conider that, or any other piece of the discussion that has taken place so far. Yos, on the other hand, is making a full case, littered with different points to reference.

No I accepted that it was possible for him to be wrong and defending LMP in a scummy fashion. I just consider it more likely that his falsehood was just part of his defending LMP rather than having a completely seperate motive.

Xine: Describe Yos's case on me.

Va: I haven't seen Jack's meta so no. The only time its too early to call people on chainsawing is before it happens.

[Empking]

Va:

I like Jack's claim.

FoS: Yos

For saying something that obviously an untruth.

Yeah, yeah. I had forgotten about that line, actually.

[Empking]

Nik: why am I scum?

[Empking]

Snake's posting has been poor but I can't say I see him as much scum as the person I'm currently voting.

Empking decided LMP was scum because LMP was defending Jack.

Thisd isn't true. as I've said numerous times, I thought LMP was scum based on him expressing happiness at Jack's claim.

[Empking]

Eld: Yes he's scummy.

Yos: Give me a quote where LMP says that he doesn't like Jack's claim and

just

thinks its an unlikerly scum gambit. (other than when he quoted you and said "WIN")

[Empking]

Yos: Give me a quote where LMP says that he doesn't like Jack's claim and

just

thinks its an unlikerly scum gambit. (other than when he quoted you and said "WIN")

I'm confused here by your thought process, empking; what did you think LMP meant by that line, if not "I think Jack is probably town"? It seemed obvious in context, especially after his next post.

That he considered Jack's claim as beneficial for town.

CJ's vote just strike me as poor play rather than scummy.

[Empking]

Yos: Give me a quote where LMP says that he doesn't like Jack's claim and

just

thinks its an unlikerly scum gambit. (other than when he quoted you and said "WIN")

I'm confused here by your thought process, empking; what did you think LMP meant by that line, if not "I think Jack is probably town"? It seemed obvious in context, especially after his next post.

That he considered Jack's claim as beneficial for town.

That wasn't how I read it, especially not in light of his next post. In any case; are you saying that you think that LMP has some incorrect ideas about mafia theory and about what is beneficial for the town, and that makes him scum?

Being happy about a page three claim by one of our two power roles in not "some incorrect ideas" it goes far beyond that (into scum).

[Empking]

I've said all I have to say. I'm willing to hammer you but I consider LMP scummier.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Snake

- I wouldn't be pleased to see him lynched but I would be happy with it.

[Empking]

Vote: UK

[Empking]

"one of todays potential bandwagons" ugh.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote; Haylen

I've got myu bearings straight with this game again so I consider Haylen's recent posts as opportunistic silliness rather than actual scumhunting.

[Empking]

Oh look an attack. Now, see, if I vote him he will call it OMGUS and pretend he's got me in some sort of trap. I know! I'll do it anyway!

Vote Empking

-_-

Making veilled attacks is scummy (town would make open attacks).

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: UK

[Empking]

#2 is not damning in the least. #1 is really bad either.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Antihero

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: UK

[Empking]

Vote: Jack

FoS: Haylen

- Putting suspicion on our cop with no real thoughts about why he's scum. ("Nacho is scum because he got a guilty on a SK!" "Oh that's wrong. Well he's guilty because he kept the result to himself!"

Actually I convinced myself while I'm writing this.

Unvote

Vote: Haylen

[Empking]

Oh, I found the other scum. Three out of four down!

That is a blatant misrep and you know it. I've stated my reasons for believed Nacho to be scum, do I need to pick one now? Has mafia really come down to needing one good reason to lynch someone, rather than many reasons?

So is just a coincidence that you came up with the new reason after your original reason was rebutted?

LMP: It seemed very unlikely that UK was the SK. (The "actual" SK counterclaimed.)

[Empking]

UK claims SK and suggests he can be a vig
nacho has a guilty on UK so knows/thinks UK is lying
nacho claims his guilty result
there was a mod error

Then why is he still alive?

Doc or you decided to leave him alive so you can play like this today. (I'm betting doc though.)

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: LMP

[Empking]

LMP... you aren't UK.
Get your head out of your ass and start producing something; you shouldn't feel so overwhelmed by pressure when there's none on you.

This is called strawmanning. Either you haven't read the last few pages and didn't notice LMP was at L-1 or you are trying to just strawmanning because it is pretty obvious he's under pressure.

Does L-1 automatically equal pressure?

[Empking]

I would like to point out that the quickness of this wagon after everybody was so happily bandwagonning me is suspicious.

Why?

[Empking]

I have done a re-skim of this game. I have not found LMP to be conclusively scum, and therefore I am unwilling to vote him. My main 2 suspects are Empking, for the same reasons I had before+ more active lurking. and Antihero, who had failed to post in this thread in 10 days, but is still posting all over MS. None of his posts in this game looked at all townish to me either.
VOTE: Antihero

Everyone look at this post.

Real hard.

"My main two suspects are Empking, who I say to have put a case out on, and Antihero, who needs to be replaced. I'm voting the complete lurker."

Scum.

With LMP.
And Haylen.

I thought the same BUT, according to Nacho, Xine is confirmed town.

[Empking]

I have done a re-skim of this game. I have not found LMP to be conclusively scum, and therefore I am unwilling to vote him. My main 2 suspects are Empking, for the same reasons I had before+ more active lurking. and Antihero, who had failed to post in this thread in 10 days, but is still posting all over MS. None of his posts in this game looked at all townish to me either.
VOTE: Antihero

Everyone look at this post.

Real hard.

"My main two suspects are Empking, who I say to have put a case out on, and Antihero, who needs to be replaced. I'm voting the complete lurker."

Scum.

With LMP.
And Haylen.

I thought the same BUT, according to Nacho, Xine is confirmed town.

The same person who said the SK was a guilty?

Yes and who was confirmed as a cop by the mod admitting to his error.

[Empking]

Empking, are you defending me? that seems really odd to me.

The cop has got an innocent on you.

[Empking]

BTW, if LMP is scum, RedCoyote is probably scum with him, for the whole "why do you think Nacho is off-wagon" comment. Terribad. It's like Red is trying to convince us that Nacho has an innocent on LMP, when the odds of Nacho having investigated LMP are very small, at best.

Especially considering his investigations are all accounted for.

[Empking]

That is a lovely case on LMP Glork.

If Lmp flips scum, I will be even more convinced of Epmking as scum, since the only thing he's done, other then active lurker style votes, is to try to string Yos up for "defending" LMP. So...Emp creates an entire case out of the assuption that lmp is scum, and does not vote him, just pushes the wagon on a townie.
If LMP flips scum, I will be less convinced of antihero as scum, their bickerings look legit, not like distancing to me.
Haylen and AGar, again looks like pretty legit bicking, and both seem scummy in their own way. I would bet that exactly one of the two is scum,
and Jack. No reason, just gut.

Are you suggesting that I voted Yos?

[Empking]

Vote: Anti

[Empking]

Vote: Anti

Why have you chosen this, rather than voting for one of the people who were trying to discredit the LMP wagon? (ie, Haylen and RedCoyote)

Glork said Anti was scum (I'd easily be willing to go with RC though.)

[Empking]

Vote: Anti

Why have you chosen this, rather than voting for one of the people who were trying to discredit the LMP wagon? (ie, Haylen and RedCoyote)

Glork said Anti was scum (I'd easily be willing to go with RC though.)

so you're listening to glork blindly?

I wouldn't say that but yes.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: RC