Mini 1126 - Game over - Was Averagely Suspicious saved?

[Hiraki]

I give up.

[subgenius]

Oh. Oh boy. Nice catch. Damn it, subs needs serious rope today.

Are these two separate points, or am I somehow wrapped up with Wikki now as well?

[GreyICE]

Oh. Oh boy. Nice catch. Damn it, subs needs serious rope today.

Are these two separate points, or am I somehow wrapped up with Wikki now as well?

Sadly scum come in teams

[Barry Allen]

OK...
-Rob seems to believe that subs and Hiraki are scum
-Sub believes that Rob and Barry are scum
-Hiraki thinks Bill is scum and doesn't understand why the rest of us don't get it, and seems exasperated by Rob

As for me...my vote is still on Subs though I have also stated my suspicions of Bill (who has been lurky of late but promises a big old post on Pacific Standard Time very soon ). And Subs - you have fixated on the last two folks to vote you (myself and Rob, who btw also seems fixated on Hiraki) while seeming to forget that there are three other votes on you. If you give us a reason to accept you are town instead of telling us what scummy jerks we are for looking at you in the first place, you might actually find someone listening.

One last thing - I am glad to see some additional voices rejoining the thread. Lurking is not cool, and frankly we need some additional points of view, both to shed light on what we have already discussed....and maybe to let us know why we shouldn't suspect lurkers..

[subgenius]

Sadly scum come in teams

Yes, they do. Interesting point, indeed. Now could you answer my direct and simple question, please?

And one other one: Why only 3 of your last 75 posts in the last two days for us?

And Subs - you have fixated on the last two folks to vote you (myself and Rob, who btw also seems fixated on Hiraki) while seeming to forget that there are three other votes on you. If you give us a reason to accept you are town instead of telling us what scummy jerks we are for looking at you in the first place, you might actually find someone listening.

Addressed this in Post #241. I'm only focusing on you two, because you two put the only votes on me that I think are scummy. I haven't accused anyone else of being scum for casting their vote on me, because they strike me as sincere. Wrong, but sincere. I don't think that's the case with you or Rob due to your timing and comments after you cast your vote. I've answered the cases against me as best as I can, and I'm trying to resume a normal life of scum hunting. You two are my top suspects. I've stated my reasons (which you've continued to ignore), and they have very little to do with the fact that you claim to find me suspicious.

[Barry Allen]

OK, sub - let's talk. You don't like the "timing" of my vote - in other words, you don't like being at L-2. That's a bit of a WIFOM argument, as you could say that about any vote (you also seem to not like Rob putting you at L-3, but are okay with L-4 and L-5). However, you also think I'm trying to bring the last votes down on you, and that doing so is terribly scummy. Huh? If I believe you're scum I should try to convince others. That's not scummy, again that's WIFOM. That being said, though, you seriously misinterpret my posts. Let's talk about the posts you have referenced as concerning to you:

1. I posted that question to Papa Zito because I did not get why he was voting one way, then throwing in what seemed to be a bit of a random line that he supported a BW on you. That didn't sound to me like "I am voting player X but am keeping my eye on Player Y as well" - it hit me as odd so I asked for a response. I get why you are looking at this one in a different light, but that was my intent. I will say once again though, even if your opinion had been right on this post I don't believe it is "shady" to try to convince others of your stand on a player. If that's true, then everyone who has posted an opinion so far must be scum.

2. Your post 214 includes a partial quote of me, which you interpret as "subtle prompting to get the last few votes" on you. Let's put that quote in context..."further, you are using Bill's explanation of his own post (which frankly looks bad for Bill) as evidence on Hiraki (who actually voted Bill)." I directed that sentence squarely at you, as evidence that YOU are scummy. Bill's explanation of his prior post didn't hold water to me, and your attempt to use Bill's bad post as evidence of Hiraki being mafia struck me as scummy. If mentioning any other player's name is "subtle prompting", that's in your imagination, not in my case.

tldr - I still think Bill looks shady, but at this point I think the case on sub is stronger. I don't agree with sub's interpretation of my remarks, and my vote stays unless I see something that either convinces me that I'm wrong about sub or shows me that the evidence on someone else is stronger.

[subgenius]

If I believe you're scum I should try to convince others.

Sure, If you believe I'm scum, that makes sense, but I don't think you legitimately believe I'm scum, primarily because of the discrepancy between the lateness of your vote and the early availability of the evidence you used to justify your vote, which I mentioned in #228, but never fully explained. So here we go:

You voted for me in post #203:

subgenius - I am struck by several things in your posts. You kept after Hiraki for a number of posts for his mistaken FoS on me, continuing to press on why there wasn't an explanation posted with the FoS at the time. Then, you backpedal in some of your posts, while stating that Hiraki looks scummy for backpedaling. You accuse Hiraki of "rewriting history", and though I may be missing it, I don't see that point.

I was wrapped up with Hiraki by post #186. You made three posts in between 186 and 203 without any mention of my back and forth with Hiraki. Then, after seeing I have 4 votes on me, you come back with #203, which claims that an exchange which you had already let pass with no remark is the entire basis for your vote, and in the same post you start asking Zito why he isn't voting for me. This does not strike me as a legitimate progression.

1. I posted that question to Papa Zito because I did not get why he was voting one way, then throwing in what seemed to be a bit of a random line that he supported a BW on you. That didn't sound to me like "I am voting player X but am keeping my eye on Player Y as well" - it hit me as odd so I asked for a response. I get why you are looking at this one in a different light, but that was my intent. I will say once again though, even if your opinion had been right on this post I don't believe it is "shady" to try to convince others of your stand on a player. If that's true, then everyone who has posted an opinion so far must be scum.

We've been through this. Your post on Zito was a great scum post, because it's subtle and you have a very clear out. I can't prove your intent, but the fact that you waited so long to cast your vote, combined with the evidence you chose to use, combined with asking Zito about his vote, looks incredibly scummy. Unfortunately, it will probably take my death for people to believe it.

2. Your post 214 includes a partial quote of me, which you interpret as "subtle prompting to get the last few votes" on you. Let's put that quote in context..."further, you are using Bill's explanation of his own post (which frankly looks bad for Bill) as evidence on Hiraki (who actually voted Bill)." I directed that sentence squarely at you, as evidence that YOU are scummy. Bill's explanation of his prior post didn't hold water to me, and your attempt to use Bill's bad post as evidence of Hiraki being mafia struck me as scummy. If mentioning any other player's name is "subtle prompting", that's in your imagination, not in my case.

Providing the whole quote makes no difference. "(Which frankly looks bad for Bill)," is an attempt to link Bill and me. You're saying, "Subgenius, you're scum, and the fact that you're using Bill's quote as part of your case makes Bill look scummier as well." This is baiting a response from Bill concerning me with the understanding that if he doesn't come out against me, you'll probably consider it a scummy.

[Hiraki]

Oh. Oh boy. Nice catch. Damn it, subs needs serious rope today.

Are these two separate points, or am I somehow wrapped up with Wikki now as well?

Sadly scum come in teams

But, how did you get subgenius there too? Why subgenius rather than someone else?

[subgenius]

Yes, they do. Interesting point, indeed. Now could you answer my direct and simple question, please?
And one other one: Why only 3 of your last 75 posts in the last two days for us?

6 posts in other games since this question, and still no answer. Are you avoiding us? Do we smell funny?

[GreyICE]

Sadly scum come in teams

But, how did you get subgenius there too? Why subgenius rather than someone else?[/quote]
'cause I've only laid out the case on subs a few times?

Wikki is more likely to be confused town than sub is to be town. Wikki actually reads more like the classic day 1 mislynch to me, although scummier than the typical one.

[GreyICE]

And sub - plllleeeaassseee don't ask me to discuss ongoing games. If you look at my recent posts, you'll see a distinct pattern.

This game has also stalled like shit.

[Barry Allen]

*sigh*
OK, Sub, let's address the timing issue. You don't seem to argue with my vote per se, nor do you seem to argue with the evidence I've used to make my case...you just don't like the timing. That's an odd defense, and an odd "case" you are trying to use on me, but I will tell you the reason for the timing just because it seems to matter so much to you. I work on the road, and was gone from home for most of the week - logging in on the company laptop when I could (have to be careful how much I use it for these games). I did log in and posted from time to time to remain active - but I didn't get the chance to truly sit down and analyze the thread the way I wanted to until I got home. Up to that point I was trying to choose between Bill and wikki after removing my EA vote. When I re-read the thread and charted the posts and cases out on my home compy, what pops up on my scumdar but you, sub. You're right, it was some earlier posts of yours that got my attention when I re-read the thread - but you have done nothing since to take my suspicions off of you. You have posted poor defenses, given OMGUS arguments, and even now your big problem is NOT my vote, NOT the evidence, but the timing? Give me a break.

As for the partial quote you wish to continue to argue about, my point was NOT to ask Bill to vote you - I think Bill is a potential scum, so why would I ask for HIS vote for you? I wasn't actually asking for anyone to vote with that post, but rather I was pointing out that it looked shady for you to use Bill's poor defense as a reason to go after Hiraki. Bill's poor defense in that post should be a reason to go after Bill, not someone else.

I expect you to disagree with a case posted against you - I never expect someone to just up and confess. And, in case you haven't noticed, there

hasn't

been a rush to take you to L-1 or lynch since my vote. We are still debating things as we should. If you are truly town, then tell us why the evidence is wrong and why you are town instead of complaining about the timing of my vote or what a jerk I supposedly am for voting you in the first place. You may be surprised to find out that I would actually listen when you aren't OMGUS'ing.

[Bill McQuill]

All right, since I been gone:

It was a ridiculous post but not entirely unexpected, as he's obviously used to a significantly different type of mafia. I'm more concerned with you going after all the really obvious targets and generally attacking bad play rather than finding scum.

Attacking bad play may not exactly equate to finding scum, but the idea is that certain patterns of bad play are bad

because

they tend to reveal scum to be scum. I think one tendency of newer players who draw scum is to be overly deferrent to the overall town's opinion and to plead their newness as a defense, and his ridiculously "heartfelt" apology rings of both of those to me. Another tendency of scum is to come to the early defense of players perceived as new, since they're more likely to make mistakes later in the game and make easy mislynch targets, so your defense here is also noted.

Bill, real quick

you are using a null tell to make wikki seem scummy and only using that reason for your vote is a failure to scum hunt

my vote is noticing you aren't scum hunting and using a null tell to make wikki seem scummy. If you had other reasons you should have posted them at the time of your vote, but using AtE alone is not reason to lynch anyone.

I still think wikki's post was an exceptional case. I agree that AtE is not alone enough to lynch somebody, but I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to apply early-day pressure to players who are prone to it.

I knew people were going to pile on you for your pre-game post, and I think you deserved the scrutiny, but I felt no need to hop aboard your band wagon when it almost certainly wasn't going to amount to anything and others were going to say what needed to be said anyway.

So... you agreed with a wagon's reasoning, you "knew" that players were going to agree with you and form a wagon, but... you didn't want to join the wagon for mysterious reasons related to your foreknowledge that it wasn't going anywhere? That is a pretty extremely ineffective way to play, and it's convenient that you wanted your cake and to eat it to by mentioning that you thought he deserved scrutiny after the fact of that scrutiny.

And everyone that's saying I'm trying to use AtE, excuse me for being sincere. I could care less about appealing to anyone's emotion, I just like to own up to and take responsibility for my mistakes. And if you guys would all rather me play Bad Cop and yell in your faces, that can be arranged.

Man, it might be nice if you did, since the opposite appears to be getting you nowhere useful.

I would also like to point out that AshBlade has been EXTREMELY fickle. @Post #111, he jumped on a not-so-RVS wagon, understandable. @Post #142, he points out how I look scummy, points out how Barry looks scummy, and switches his vote to Hiraki. @Post#153, he adds to the offenses against me, and points out that he supports a Bill lynch. @Post #167, he continues to FoS Barry of lurking (After saying in Post 142 that he thought Barry was all over the place), and he switches his vote to Subgenius.

His statements are inconsistent with each other, he hasn't kept to the same FoS's for more than two posts in a row (Even after commenting on how FoS's were little more than a joke), he has brought suspicion against 6 out of the 13 people playing, and I have literally commented on every single post he has made, except for his most recent (Post#176), which is irrelevant at present. He has had nothing to say to help stir up discussion, nor has he said anything beneficial to the town. All he is doing is throwing out a few sentences on the many people who he has found to be acting scummy. He's going after the smallest scum-tells he can find.

That's a bit better. Just so long as the rest of your D1 posting isn't more and more hand-wringing.

I've played a grand total of two games in that time, but hop aboard the wagon anyway. There's still more room.

Hackles raised.

I like Barry's 203. Still think my reasoning for voting EA was pretty clear, but him finally taking a stance is encouraging.

P.S. If mockingjaye flips scum Rob must be turbolynched with extreme prejudice.

Ah, the lurker hunt. Timed about right. I'm confused by this sentiment about Rob, though. Not a huge fan of the "If X, then Y must be lynced" approach, though, but I get the feeling PZ's not real into deigning to explain his reasons for saying things, given his earlier proclamation of EA's townieness.

Oh, it makes perfect sense. But we'll get to that later.

I was right!

Agree totally with EA's 227, though I find that the Taco Bell shits don't generally hit until I'm in my car on the way home.

I'm saying it's shady for you to hop on my bandwagon late and then prod Zito about why he doesn't have his vote on me. I think it makes you look a bit blood thirsty.

But I agree with this too, in principle. I'm willing to label Barry's play as "perplexing," but I might not go so far as to say "scummy" yet.

bill, were your ears ringing? that was awfully convenient by the way

I don't like this kind of limp-wristed reaffirmation of suspicion, which you and Ash and Snake have all posted some form of.

Bullshit and you know it. Erratus wagon was opportunistic. Bill was the one who liked opportunity.

Rob is just being stupid at the moment. Bill was scummy, and he knows it.

And for the record, there is no possible way that I'm lurking. It's D1, 11 Pages. I've had no prod checks.

Here's a better question.

Rob. Why aren't you voting me?

Passcue me? Am I the only one being raked over the coals for "opportunistically" voting for Erratus in this post? And what's with the over-defensiveness about whether or not you've lurked? And how would Rob's answer to that question give you any information at all? Is there something scummy about... not voting for you?

6 posts in other games since this question, and still no answer. Are you avoiding us? Do we smell funny?

Wow, you are one fidgety player.

Wikki actually reads more like the classic day 1 mislynch to me, although scummier than the typical one.

This... is a strange thing to say. Scummier than the typical classic day 1 mislynch, eh?

My top 3 after all of that:
1. subgenius - Has spent a lot of time under pressure, has done almost nothing constructive during that time except lash out at the people voting for him, is extremely fidgety about phrasing and post frequency, both of which look like desperate attempts to build mountains out of molehills and survive.
2. mockingjaye/bvoight - We've come a pretty long way to have contributed nothing whatsoever of any substance, and I really don't like ending days with a complete null-read on somebody.
3. wikkiden. His most recent post was better, but since then it's been radio silence, which is what I'd expect from a player who's trying to distance himself from a massive emotional apology earlier in the game. There's also the contradiction that EA pointed out.

Unvote, Vote: subgenius

. That's L-1. I think of particular note is his post 199, where he welcomes more pressure in a cavalier manner that appears to make him look confident he can deflect the pressure, followed by his subsequent accusations against the most recent members of his wagon and his constant stream of argumentativeness instead of actual analysis.

[Ashblade]

For one, we don't have a consensus, and for another, we have 2 players who have not contributed anything at all. Ending the day would be very premature right now. Town generally benefits from more discussion anyway, so I don't get why you're suggesting a lynch already when day 1 has been going on for less than a week.

There's a point where you're not going to get anything better without a flip and town slows to a crash (I'd have the perfect game to show but it's still ongoing). With that said there's still at least one person who needs to provide input before this day ends, and that's our new replacement. I'd also like to see another post from wiki. Especially after what has already been found on him.

I've been reading Hiraki vs. Rob a bit closer... and I'm coming up null on both of them, with a slight edge of town to Hiraki. Not entirely sure why, but I think Hiraki's town read comes from posts like This one.

Zito I also read as town for having the same town feeling I had because of something before (lolmeta) and his pokes at others. It's no "read" by any means but I'd be more surprised if he turned up scum than town right now.

Grey is null, his fire isn't on fire here and it's disheartening. Maybe it's because we're dancing in circles right now.

and everyone else I've either commented on before or I haven't any good read on them except EA, who I do think is most likely town by the "speed wagon" and his posts.

Was expecting to do more with this post but I didn't think I wouldn't get to it until 4 AM. x_x Oh well.

[Hiraki]

All right, since I been gone:

Bullshit and you know it. Erratus wagon was opportunistic. Bill was the one who liked opportunity.

Rob is just being stupid at the moment. Bill was scummy, and he knows it.

And for the record, there is no possible way that I'm lurking. It's D1, 11 Pages. I've had no prod checks.

Here's a better question.

Rob. Why aren't you voting me?

Passcue me? Am I the only one being raked over the coals for "opportunistically" voting for Erratus in this post? And what's with the over-defensiveness about whether or not you've lurked? And how would Rob's answer to that question give you any information at all? Is there something scummy about... not voting for you?

I haven't taken a good look at the wagon, but you're the one that shows out the most. I haven't been overdefensive about it, because it's such a false claim, and the reason I asked the question is because it seems like Rob thinks I'm scum.

[subgenius]

@Barry
I'm through believing that addressing the cases against me is useful in any kind of way. You're voting for me because you think I pushed against Hiraki for too long, my "backpedal", and disagreeing with the 'rewriting history' comment. I've explained the back pedal and 'rewriting history' several times to no effect. It's been explained several times why simply making a case isn't scummy. What more can I say? Also, I've never called you a jerk, and I don't think you are a jerk, just scum.

@Bill
Similarly, Bill has decided to vote me for an off handed comment inviting more people on my wagon. I can truthfully say it was a mix of sarcasm and frustration, but I think it's pretty futile at this point. Congrats on finding a new and unused reason to vote for me, and welcome aboard, though.

@GreyICE
Not asking you to discuss ongoing games, just wondering why you're ducking this one. If it's stalled, try to unstall us.

[Dekes]

Votecount 1.3

subgenius (L-1): Erratus Apathos, GreyICE, Ashblade, RobCapone, Barry Allen, Bill McQuill
Bill McQuill (L-5): Hiraki, Snake Eyes
bvoigt (L-6): Papa Zito
Barry Allen (L-6): subgenius
Papa Zito (L-6): Hayker

Not voting: bvoigt, wikkiden

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch and 7 to no lynch.

Deadline is

March, the 3rd, at 06:00 p.m. EST

wikkiden has received his first prod.

[RobCapone]

I'd line to add that the reason this game has stalled is cause of lack of people posting

ice, zito, haker, mocking-bvoigt player spot

[Barry Allen]

@Barry
Also, I've never called you a jerk, and I don't think you are a jerk, just scum.

You are right, you've never called me a jerk - that was unfair on my part. I may think you're scum, but this is still a game and I don't need to put those words in your mouth.

One other note - I agree we need more of our folks to come forward and post. We started as one of the most active rounds I've ever been in...but we seem to be way too slow right now. I do want to hear from bvoigt, since that's our newest player and some fresh eyes may be what we need - but I think all our inactives/lurkers need to step up and post.

[Hiraki]

Or because no more townies want to get on the wagon.

That's probably it.

FYI: Ice posted today.

Zito posted yesterday.

Hayker posted yesterday night.

And bviogot replaced in yesterday.

Therefore, we can assess that. People do not spend every waking second on mafiascum.net and that everyone here should stop botching about lurkers. AKA: RobCapone

P.E.: See? Barry only got one "lurker". Good job there.

[RobCapone]

Their lack of content though is stalling the game, they can take the limited time they have and discuss more

zito to me has seemed to avoid scum hunting all together and despite being for a subs lynch (or was previously) he hasn't really commented on why nor has he talked about anything else going on with the wagon

Lots if people just sort of posting to avoid prods (in my opinion anyway)

[Barry Allen]

Hiraki - I think we have different definitions of lurker. To me there is a difference between inactive and a lurker - an inactive just doesn't post, but a lurker rarely posts and doesn't really contribute to the round. I'm asking for those less-contributive players to step up and contribute something. I do think that includes more than one person - but it depends on your definition of "lurker" versus how I'm looking at it.

[Barry Allen]

...and to clarify, I'm not looking for votes, I'm looking for someone to contribute to the thread besides the smaller number of us who've been more active. Hiding in the shadows and just posting enough to not be prodded is not the same as contributing.

[bvoigt]

Ugh, I'm having trouble getting definite reads in this game. Erratus Apathos is my strongest town read, because scum would have no reason to announce that they weren't voting to start the day. I also feel that subgenius is a townie getting attacked for poor play rather than scummy play.

Wikkiden is probably scum. EA's #367 is a good catch; "I truly didn't count the votes" is clearly a lie after saying, "Oh yes. My vote sucks. Along with the six other people voting for him."

Snake Eyes is another scumread. He has "a strong scum read" on Bill for "going after all the really obvious targets." But Bill was the biggest wagon when SE voted for him, so wouldn't Bill himself be the most obvious target?

I know this a pretty lousy catch-up post, but I find more stuff to comment on when I'm not reading several pages at a time. Plus, I think we've had enough wallposts for one game.

VOTE: wikkiden

[subgenius]

I'm saying it's shady for you to hop on my bandwagon late and then prod Zito about why he doesn't have his vote on me. I think it makes you look a bit blood thirsty.

But I agree with this too, in principle. I'm willing to label Barry's play as "perplexing," but I might not go so far as to say "scummy" yet.

1. subgenius - Has spent a lot of time under pressure, has done almost nothing constructive during that time except lash out at the people voting for him,

1)You agree that I had a point with Barry, even if you aren't ready to say it's scummy.
2)I have only made accusations against two people who have voted for me, Rob and Barry, and both for the same reason, which you appear to agree with on some level.
3)I don't see how you can admit that the only accusations I've made against people on my wagon make some amount of sense and then say that I've been merely lashing out against people on my wagon.

is extremely fidgety about phrasing and post frequency, both of which look like desperate attempts to build mountains out of molehills and survive.

I guess you're referring to my recent posts about GreyICE. I don't see where you're getting a mountain building vibe out of that. I just thought it was strange that he's been so active elsewhere and not here, especially since this game has been moving quickly (in circles at times, but quickly). I wanted an answer, but I wasn't handing out torches for the lynch mob.

I also feel that subgenius is a townie getting attacked for poor play rather than scummy play.

Thanks, I guess.