Mafia 124 - Dilemma Mafia (Day 6)

[Fishythefish]

I don't see it is any more likely than a BB lynch, and I'm up for either about equally.

[Llamarble]

I feel like there should be all kinds of scum on Bub's wagon by now if it's a mislynch. I would be the easiest D2mislynch ever, and I've provided PLENTY of justification for people to jump on the Bublynch.
*Checks*
Just fishy, who looks highly protown these days. The main reason I had him as a scumread (associative with Bub) before was that when he mentioned Bub's behavior he didn't class it as a tell, and I thought he might be subtly advising Bubbuddy to get his act together, but that is looking pretty darn unlikely at this point and in retrospect that wasn't a good reason at all anyway. And his scumhunting simply looks good.
So I'm feeling more and more confident about Bubscum.

Also I thought I had mined Bub dry of scumtells but I guess I glossed over this on previous reads:
There was a midgame Bub-Nik interaction where Bub FOSes Nik and asks him questions, then simply calls him a VI and too silly to be scum a bit later without a response in between and leaves the situation at that. Nik points out the weirdness of this and Bub ignores him.

Can we please lynch this guy today?

[Empking]

Vote Count 18

1. bobsnox (2) - DarlaBlueEyes, CMAR
2. DarlaBlueEyes (2) - MoreWhisky, werewolf555
3. werewolf555
4. DLG (1) - Nikanor
5. Jahudo
6. Bub Bidderskins (2) - Llarmable, Fishythefish
7. Fishythefish (1) - bobsnox
8. Brokenscraps
9. CryMeARiver
10. Nikanor
11. Yosarian2
12. Final Fires
13. Llarmable (3) - Yosarian2, Bub Bidderskins, Brokenscraps,
14. MoreWhisky (3) - Jahudo, Final Fires, DLG


Not Voting:


With 14 alive its 8 to lynch.

[bobsnox]

guess this game has an appropriate name

[DLG]

So, instead of a relatively cohesive town that drove two wagons to L-2 and L-1 (twice ready to be hammered), roughly a week before deadline, we now are at just 3+ days with a fractured town chasing down phantoms and no sign of cohesion.

The two wagons were on DarlaBlueEyes and the ender241/Llamarble slot. There was suspicious interaction between those two players and both wagons were justified independent of the other.

I'd like an explanation for how this environment is more likely to achieve a town win from the players who insisted that the Day was being rushed.

I feel like there should be all kinds of scum on Bub's wagon by now if it's a mislynch. I would be the easiest D2mislynch ever, and I've provided PLENTY of justification for people to jump on the Bublynch.
*Checks*
Just fishy, who looks highly protown these days.

This is the same backdoor "logic" that Fishythefish used as part of his justification for voting ender241 over DarlaBlueEyes. It completely ignores the fact that a group of townies can see scumminess and be unwilling to be distracted.

You would not be an easy Day 2 lynch over this. Being wrong does not mean being scum. Being wrong with bad or no justification is indicative of scum.

Fishythefish looks highly proLlamarble these days. He also looks highly anti-town cohesion these days. Neither of these is protown.

I don't see it is any more likely than a BB lynch, and I'm up for either about equally.

Yes, up for anything that would keep the town fractured. Why is your motivation so anti-town?

@ werewolf555
Welcome to the game. Your input is of prime importance at this stage.

[Fishythefish]

Please explain how my play is "antitown". AFAIC, my play is antitown if and only if Llamarble is scum. It is not automatically antitown to try and derail a lynch that looks like happening. Cohesiveness =/= scum lynch. I saw a consensus I strongly disliked the origins of, so I went after it.

@DLG: I made a post where I criticised every (or nearly every, not sure) reason for which you have voted Llama. You have made no response.

[Nikanor]

Oh fine. I guess if we NEED to lynch somebody...

Unvote. Vote: MoreWhiskey.

[Jahudo]

Three days until deadline I think? We should talk about compromise in case we need it, and to see where people stand on all these wagons.

Most of them I disagree with. I still want Whisky to come in and respond to my points, but I can't even tell if he's reading this thread anymore. He's turning into another ender. So bobs might be right in saying he would be good vigbait (if we have a vig), so it may be worth waiting a day on Whisky.

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

@Bub: If you thought Darla was being cautious scum then how do you account for her more aggressive behavior starting with bobsnox? If it looked unnatural to you, you kept your opinions to yourself and didn't question her about the change in tone. It just looked like you were parked on that vote for the long haul regardless of what she was doing. You even shrug off your own statements that bobs is starting to do scummy things because it involves Darla, which would have been a good time to point out how Darla was reacting to bobs and how that affected or didn't affect your read.

[Yosarian2]

I'm really upset by the way the ender/Llamarble wagon has evaporated right before deadline for no good reason I can see. It feels like when he got in trouble, he just spammed up the thread with a bunch of garbage, and so everyone just dropped the case, even though he wasn't actually looking any more town.

I would still probably be willing to lynch MoreWhiskey, or possibly bobsnox, in order to achieve a no-lynch, but I wouldn't be happy about it at this point.

[werewolf555]

Looking over, I believe that the llar marble wagon was a good one
VOTE: Llarmable

[DLG]

Please explain how my play is "antitown". AFAIC, my play is antitown if and only if Llamarble is scum. It is not automatically antitown to try and derail a lynch that looks like happening. Cohesiveness =/= scum lynch. I saw a consensus I strongly disliked the origins of, so I went after it.

@DLG: I made a post where I criticised every (or nearly every, not sure) reason for which you have voted Llama. You have made no response.

Your play looks scummy if Llamarble is scum. Your play is anti-town for helping to destroy what consensus had been achieved. This is particularly true because

your vote was part of the origins of that consensus

. I never said cohesiveness is equivalent to lynching scum. You saw a consensus that you disliked the target of. At best, you could claim to dislike the late comers to that wagon, not the origins.

I responded to the points I wanted to. I didn't respond to the others because I was unwilling to engage in a debate designed solely to distract attention from the main focus, Llamarble. Classifying what was going on as you versus me perfectly illustrates the point. It was me versus Llamarble if it was anything. Who appointed you Johnnie Cochran to Llamarble's O.J. Simpson?

@ Jahudo
Are you willing to share who you are willing to see lynched, then? By process of elimination, I'm guessing Bub Bidderskins or me.

[Final Fires]

That's four votes llama and four votes whisky now. Would everyone on the llama wagon be willing to vote whisky, and vice-versa if worst came to worst?

I'm still not really against a llama lynch, I'm just slightly more unsure of it than a whisky one. I would swap if the people on the llama wagon feel very strongly that llama should be a priority over whisky, and are unwilling to switch their vote.

We should seriously start trying to get to L-1 or L-2 soon though. It would be nice if we could have it by the end of the day, so we're not scrambling to get this done the next two days, and they'll have time to claim if need be. Plus if they claim a PR we'll have time to switch our votes.

[CryMeARiver]

That's four votes llama and four votes whisky now. Would everyone on the llama wagon be willing to vote whisky, and vice-versa if worst came to worst?

I'm still not really against a llama lynch, I'm just slightly more unsure of it than a whisky one. I would swap if the people on the llama wagon feel very strongly that llama should be a priority over whisky, and are unwilling to switch their vote.

We should seriously start trying to get to L-1 or L-2 soon though. It would be nice if we could have it by the end of the day, so we're not scrambling to get this done the next two days, and they'll have time to claim if need be. Plus if they claim a PR we'll have time to switch our votes.

Hmmmm, at this point I'm comfortable with Bob and Bub the most, but I'd be willing to switch to whisky if worst came to worst I think.

[Llamarble]

How is "We should be cohesive" a good reason to lynch somebody AT ALL? Scum have a bunch of votes that they want to use together to get somebody lynched. Therefore scummy wagons are often "cohesive." It is obviously much easier for scum to agree than for town. The most important goal of a lynch by far is to kill scum.

At the risk of more "look he changed his mind!" complaints:
I reread Whisky and I no longer think he's scum. He makes a lot more sense in ISO and that "Wow I'd never have thought of that but it seems to make sense. Top idea Bob I'm gonna look into that some more." Post looks _way_ more like sarcasm than like self contradiction. Who says "wow I'd never have thought of that" or "Top Idea" nonsarcastically?? I believe he thinks what he says he thinks.


And I do find accusations of "spamming the thread" offensive; I've been responding to accusations and looking for scum.

AND DLG FISHY DOES DISLIKE THE LATECOMERS (BUB BIDDERSKINS WAS L-2)

It is a good point that we have 3 days remaining. Everybody should be voting me, Whiskey, Bub. I don't think there's a serious possibility of lynching anyone else at this point.

[DarlaBlueEyes]

urg the flu frakking sucks. But I am here now for good and am reading back the last 5 pages. /hateslife

post forthcoming in the next hour or less

[DarlaBlueEyes]

There is a lot that's happened and I am a bit surprised that the Llama wagon disintegrated so quickly, though I will say while his play at first was very scummy he since has seemed to be very aggressive in his scum hunting which is a lot more helpful and townish than what others are doing. (IE: Whiskey)

I was really not feeling good about Whiskey before my sickness, but at that time he was at least doing some scumhunting, now he's doing none and just lurking his way out of his slip up post which many people called him on two or so pages back. Do not like.

I know we're on a deadline and I do not agree that a no-lynch is going to be protown here so

vote: whiskey

If anyone wants my opinion on something specific could you ask? My head is still a little hurty and it'd make it a lot easier on me getting back into the game.

PS I'm looking over the Bud case now, but doubt he'll be more appealing than whiskey for me right now

[Bub Bidderskins]

Sorry for not posting in a while. I'm getting caught up...

I'm gonna say that if one of DBE/More Whisky is scum, then the other one is town. Their play is very poor if they're scum together. I am of the opinion that Darla is scum with Llamarble, so I'm not going to support a Whisky lynch.

[DLG]

How is "We should be cohesive" a good reason to lynch somebody AT ALL? Scum have a bunch of votes that they want to use together to get somebody lynched. Therefore scummy wagons are often "cohesive." It is obviously much easier for scum to agree than for town. The most important goal of a lynch by far is to kill scum.

"We should be cohesive" is not a reason to lynch, it is a necessary component to achieving that goal. Therefore, any wagon which results in a lynch is cohesive. Townie ones and scummy ones. Lynching scum is always the goal, and the best possible outcome. But, what is always gained in any lynch is information which is what town lacks.

AND DLG FISHY DOES DISLIKE THE LATECOMERS (BUB BIDDERSKINS WAS L-2)

I agree. But, that is not what he said and that is what I was pointing out.

I've said I'll go either way - Llamarble or MoreWhisky. I will vote anyone but myself to prevent no-lynch.

[brokenscraps]

I already explained this. Obviously scum don't want to lynch their buddies, but seeing a lot of players who would be easy to lynch on someone's scumlist suggests they care more about lynches being easy to push through than about them actually being on scum.

This still depends on them being town.

Your reasoning is generally good though. I'm unsure about lynching you today. UNVOTE: Llamarble

However, if even one of the scum wasn't voting your wagon then it is very suspicious that your wagon fell apart at L-1. I have my eye on you but am willing to have a whisky lynch today.

I really dont like this post you seem to be all over that place finding someone to pin the scum tag on. I also dont like how u ask someone a question about there actions on other players, normally this is sort of ok but here im sure this is another tactic to deflect the chat from you.

And whats all this phone business? we all have stuff to do. have some more time on the phone

vote Darla

This is how whisky votes Darla. That post didn't contain attempts to pin the scum tug on players, the questions she asks are not anti-town and posting from a phone is a horrible reason to vote someone. Yet he hasn't lifted his vote and continues to treat it as serious. Horrible vote-parking?

VOTE: whisky

[CryMeARiver]

I already explained this. Obviously scum don't want to lynch their buddies, but seeing a lot of players who would be easy to lynch on someone's scumlist suggests they care more about lynches being easy to push through than about them actually being on scum.

This still depends on them being town.

Your reasoning is generally good though. I'm unsure about lynching you today. UNVOTE: Llamarble

However, if even one of the scum wasn't voting your wagon then it is very suspicious that your wagon fell apart at L-1. I have my eye on you but am willing to have a whisky lynch today.

I really dont like this post you seem to be all over that place finding someone to pin the scum tag on. I also dont like how u ask someone a question about there actions on other players, normally this is sort of ok but here im sure this is another tactic to deflect the chat from you.

And whats all this phone business? we all have stuff to do. have some more time on the phone

vote Darla

This is how whisky votes Darla. That post didn't contain attempts to pin the scum tug on players, the questions she asks are not anti-town and posting from a phone is a horrible reason to vote someone. Yet he hasn't lifted his vote and continues to treat it as serious. Horrible vote-parking?

VOTE: whisky

Be warned: L2 (No hammers before claim, no oops hammers)
Gotta reread Whisky. And analyze his wagoning

[Yosarian2]

And I do find accusations of "spamming the thread" offensive; I've been responding to accusations and looking for scum.

Don't get me wrong; post as often as you want, the more often the better.

I just don't think that the sheer quantity of posts you made while in trouble should be a reason for people to consider you town, but it feels like that's what's going on.

[brokenscraps]

Don't get me wrong; post as often as you want, the more often the better.

I believe it was Llama who said being concise was pro-town and I think he is generally correct, it is almost impossible to respond to everything he is saying and that has been choking up the game somewhat. I prefer what he has done to the fluff of some others but posting as much as he has is confusing the town.

[Llamarble]

Okay, those responses both make sense. It was the implication of worthlessness that bothered me.
I got yelled at by Parama in my newbie game for too many walls and have made effort to be more concise in games since then, but it's definitely fair to say I relapsed here so far.

Now it's time to do a more thorough investigation of Whiskey since my previous results on him were pretty conflicted.
I'm almost certain the "top idea" thing was sarcastic regardless of his alignment though.

[Fishythefish]

Please explain how my play is "antitown". AFAIC, my play is antitown if and only if Llamarble is scum. It is not automatically antitown to try and derail a lynch that looks like happening. Cohesiveness =/= scum lynch. I saw a consensus I strongly disliked the origins of, so I went after it.

@DLG: I made a post where I criticised every (or nearly every, not sure) reason for which you have voted Llama. You have made no response.

Your play looks scummy if Llamarble is scum. Your play is anti-town for helping to destroy what consensus had been achieved. This is particularly true because

your vote was part of the origins of that consensus

. I never said cohesiveness is equivalent to lynching scum. You saw a consensus that you disliked the target of. At best, you could claim to dislike the late comers to that wagon, not the origins.

I responded to the points I wanted to. I didn't respond to the others because I was unwilling to engage in a debate designed solely to distract attention from the main focus, Llamarble. Classifying what was going on as you versus me perfectly illustrates the point. It was me versus Llamarble if it was anything. Who appointed you Johnnie Cochran to Llamarble's O.J. Simpson?

@ Jahudo
Are you willing to share who you are willing to see lynched, then? By process of elimination, I'm guessing Bub Bidderskins or me.

There is

nothing

antitown about helping destroy a bad consensus - and I think this might well be a bad consensus. By "origins" I really meant "reasons". It is indeed the late comers I dislike.

When I see terribad arguments, I will attack them and call them scummy, whoever they are on. Llama was making a lot of the points I was making, but he was rather overwhelmed and was looking a bit desperate. I thought that weighing in was necessary, so that people could see how disastrous the arguments against Llama really were. If that makes me his lawyer, then that's fine with me.

If Llama is scum, obviously there is lots of scum motivation for my recent play. We'll cross that bridge if it turns out to exist.

[Fishythefish]

Things for me to definitely do tonight: talk about MW. This is long overdue, and there's no good reason for that.