Mini 1137: Long Overdue Mafia [Game Over!]

[havingfitz]

Confirm.

[havingfitz]

yay

vote idiotking

with a name like that i doubt

we

will help town much.

You doubt "we" will help town much? I believe you.

Vote: pappums rat

[havingfitz]

I guess we should get things moving.
I'd like to ask some questions, just because we can't stay in RVS forever unfortunately.
1. When are you most likely to be posting?
2. How would you describe your play style?

1)

FOS Cecily

for inquiring about posting timeframes. I can envision the answer to this question being beneficial to scum but do not see how it matters to town.
2) Usually start off a bit slow...have a tendancy to lock in (~tunnel) on a suspect more often than I should. While I prefer short posts and hate wall-posts...I sometimes find myself caught up in wall post exchanges.

[havingfitz]

Nice...three v/LAs two days into the game.

FOS Cecily

for inquiring about posting timeframes. I can envision the answer to this question being beneficial to scum but do not see how it matters to town.

That's an interesting point. I can't think of a town benefit either, though its one of those icebreaker questions I see often. And now that I think about it scum would be more likely to lie, so it could benefit them if they want to plan out lurking times or setup quickhammers in the future. However I don't scum would come into a game thinking about that, so I don't suspect Cecily for asking the question. Its just that scum could exploit it after its asked.

@Jahudo...Cecily's response above shows it (quickhammers) is something she had in mind when she asked the question. Even with her response above I do not see how the answers would benefit her as town?

@Cecilytown...how do you plan on mitigating the possibility of a quicklynch (on you or anyone else) with the answers to your posting time question? I think it would be easier to coordinate a quicklynch among ~3 scum with the answers than I think it would have any benefit in preventing a quicklynch by ~10 town. I don't think the question is voteworthy but it could be a consideration later in the game combined with the rest of your gameplay.

As an aside...if any of you have ever played with andrew94 before...he is a pleasant enough player but is nothing but a detriment to town. I'd be up for cutting town losses and just removing the detriment before he gets too far in the game to where he (if town) would actually be relied on for his gameplay...not lamented for it. I.e. I'm up for an andrew94 policy lynch.

[havingfitz]

As an aside...if any of you have ever played with andrew94 before...he is a pleasant enough player but is nothing but a detriment to town. I'd be up for cutting town losses and just removing the detriment before he gets too far in the game to where he (if town) would actually be relied on for his gameplay...not lamented for it. I.e. I'm up for an andrew94 policy lynch.

No I haven't. Think its pretty off to be talking policy lynches at this point though and pretty scummy for that matter.

That's fine. I expect/ed some flack for bringing up the dreaded "policy lynch" but the truth is the truth. andrew is a detriment to town and town would not want him to be around when it matters (ie LYLO or the day before LYLO). If I'm scum I want him in the game...he will drive town crazy.

With the day 1 odds favoring a mislynch (short of scum making a stupid mistake) I would prefer the potential mislynch to be deadweight.

No offense andrew

[havingfitz]

A self proclaimed lazy poster who comes off scummy if you aren't familiar with his playstyle...and if you are familiar with his playstyle you still don't know wth to do with him. He posts a minimal amount of minimal content. Uhhh...let's see...at least one occasion I know of where he has claimed a town PR when he was VT, thereby causing the real town PR to counter claim and thus be nk'd. Otherwise he's a nice fellow.

I'm not advocating a quicklynch on him and thereby averting a full day's worth of discussion and tells...but if he was a candidate to be lynched it would not take a lot of persuasion for me to put my vote on him.

[havingfitz]

I agree that pappum's claim was very premature. Assuming he is telling the truth (which I believe he is) it is coming so early in the day that Voided's scum buddies will not do anything to link themselves to him. So we have essentially lost the ability to gather potentially good interations between scum partners. Best thing to do IMO is to just eliminate Voided and if by some chance pappums is not being truthful...lynch him. I would think everything else from this point on with respect to Voided is going to be WIFOM.

VOTE: Voidedmafia

[havingfitz]

How are other scum going to be pressured? Are they at risk of being lynched today?

If they aren't at risk of being lynched today all your "pressuring" is going to serve to do is to allow the remaining scum (assuming Void is in fact scum) to intelligently manipulate who they NK based on what type of pressure to do or do not recieve. Ex....we all mistakenly focus on a townie and "pressure" him. Then we lynch Void...and scum NK's one of the pressured townies main opponents. That sets up the townies mislynch tomorrow. I'm sure scum could equally come up with a beneficial way of selecting their nk as well if the pressure was appropriately placed (ie on scum). The concept is the same as voting for a no lynch without any discussion when that is deemed the right move. IMO the right move now is to prove out pappum's investigation result.

tl:dr;

If we have identified scum it is in town's best interest to eliminate asap vs letting scum manipulate or assess town. At this early stage of the game scum may not have the best idea who is the most obvtown or most dangerous town to keep alive.

[havingfitz]

pappum....what is illogical about my reasons supporting a quick voided vote? What point or points that I made do you not understand or disagree with. Please elaborate. Your early claim was poor play and your ego at thinking you have pegged a scumbuddy based on my posts is ridiculous. The fact you think I am scum bussing my partner only supports my comment that everything to do with your finding on voided from this point on is going to be WIFOM and do town no good. And the longer the day goes before we do lynch voided the more time town has to screw itself over....more so IMO than scum does.

[havingfitz]

Honestly, this sounds more like Rat just picked a random target and then just decided to give him a guilty verdict.

However, I believe that in this kind of game there can also be naive or insane or paranoid cops, which would make his claim practically useless otherwise.

The one big overhanding question, though, is this: Why the hell didya pick me? Don't like the fact that I'm not really participating? Still ticked off that I didn't participate in RVS?

https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Normal_game

'Roles which are explicitly Non-Normal include:
Non-Sane Cops, Blanks/Quacks, Janitor, Survivor, Lyncher, Cultist, Jester, Scum Masons, Bus Driver, Lightning Rod, Nexus, Redirector.'

eod.

Not exactly eod...

Mini Normal Games

[*]There can only be a maximum of one new/variant role in the game.
[*]Only normal mechanics and roles (

besides the single variant

) are allowed. See here for more information.

That said, until we have a voided flip I am inclined to believe your investigation.

Also pappums...you failed to answer my questions to you.

[havingfitz]

i did an

exhausting

(lol) re-read of the game, and i am definately not liking havingfitz' call for a policy lynch on andrew. if andrew had been actively doing anti-town things and was being a menace, then i probably would have went along with it, as i agree with pl's a good deal of the time. but when it was based solely on meta, i dont think so. combined with his rush to get this day over, he is my #2 scumread atm.

Agreed 100% - as discussed earlier, both these examples indicate Fitz avoidin talking about what was happenning in the game both by discussing PL and then attempting to end - if he did end up turning up scum, makes me wonder if there was some sort of minor scum slip early on, he was looking to avoid talking about.

The suggestion that andrew be considered for a policy lynch (in lieu of any concrete targets such as we now have with Voided) was not to avoid conversation.

I'm not advocating a quicklynch on him and thereby averting a full day's worth of discussion and tells...but if he was a candidate to be lynched it would not take a lot of persuasion for me to put my vote on him.

The suggestion to get on with Voided's lynch is. The more town run's around with it's head cut off as to what is or isn't the best move with Voided and who is or isn't his potential scumbuddies...the more benefit there is to scum IMO. If anyone disagrees with this train of thought I would like to hear your reasons why. To start day 2 off at 2 scum and 9 town (assuming 3 scum and 10 town now) should be reward enough. In this situation (pappum's result) I see continued discussion as a negative.

[havingfitz]

The thing is Fitz, is I don't see us being stupid enough to let Voided off the hook.

I don't believe I said or insinuated anywhere that town was going to let Void off the hook. I think it's pretty much a done deal hence my position on getting it over with.

However I agree with your theory, it'd be absolutely nuts and so much WIFOM we'd get drunk, if we sat around during the day trying to figure out who Voided's partners were, since Voided has said relatively nothing, and there hasn't been much time to establish any real tells.

OK...so you agree....but why following up that you agree with me by proposing the exact opposite (below) of what I am?

I would like to use the day - 17 more days - for everyone to continue pressuring whoever they found scummy to begin with, and move on from there. Near the week before deadline, we could easily just wagon back on Voided and end the day.

[havingfitz]

It looks like he's mostly resigned himself to being lynched.

Considering that I think his claim is bollocks, and that I think there's little reason for him to do so, yet everyone is still going along with it, why wouldn't I?

Voided....why should we not believe pappum's claim? What would be his incentive to not tell the truth? I believe the different possibilities have already been covered well enough and there aren't any good ones I can see that involve pappum lying.

I think a one shot day investigative role that returns inaccurate results would be a pretty crappy role to put in the town. Also...I think your claim is pretty fishy as you claimed you were going to be picking your neighbors at night (which I do not believe is how the Neighbor role is set up to work) and then you change your role to the Neighborizer. That's a pretty unusual role IMO opinion to forget and/or confuse with just a standard Neighbor.

I'm assuming your "Neighborizer" is someone who can recruit/select others to be his neighbor. I'm not familiar with this role (like a cult leader?) but it could just as easily be a sccum aligned role. And as has already been mentioned...if you aren't scum, then wth is pappums doing?

At least you should have some solace in the fact that is pappums' result is not accurate...that he is probably next on the gallows.

[havingfitz]

Voided...none of the options you provide above explain why pappums would call you guilty when if you are town...he's lynched next. I applaud your efforts to turn things around and stay alive but your reasons for disputing pappums claim don't hold water...your claim seems off...and there is no non-suicidal reason for pappum to fakeclaim a result on you.

[havingfitz]

We seem to have stalled a bit. Looking forward to hearing from the day+ absentees. Still not interested in doing much more than getting to the bottom of the pappum claim (ie lynching Voided). Anything else is just icing on scum's cake IMO.

[havingfitz]

That fakeclaim was bullshit pappums. The fact you lied and then came clean does not in any way clear you as someone mentioned above. The fact you took a game that was still in the fairly early stages and completely derailed it with a lie about someone else...and basically skewed the rest of the conversations by having them based on your lie, did nothing but waste two RL days and 4 pages of discussion. And you forced Voided to claim (though I don't think mafia would be worried about a "Neighborizor").

Still not sure Voided's claim is legit either and it in no way confirms him as town. He could still be scum and easily either neighbor up with a townie or claim to neighbor with one of his scum partners. We don't know. And now we are back almost as far as we were when the fakeclaim was made. Nice focking lying gambit. Just kidding.

Unvote,

VOTE: pappum's lying ass rat

[havingfitz]

However, I don't like Fitz either, for scummy play and reasons I've already posted.

What scummy reasons do you refer to. You mention opposition to my "just get the lynch over with" sentiment which I had explained my rationale for somewhat in detail. Iirc I also asked you some questions regarding your suspicions which you have not answered. If you maintain suspicions on me I would appreciate you explaing how you disagreed with my suggestion. Not that it matters now since it was all based on a lie but as you still harbor those suspicions an explanation would be nice.

neil, I get your point, but explain to me why pappums benefits from this gambit AND coming out with it now as scum. Please.

He benefits from the fact you (and some others) apparently think scum would never do such a gambit. That is, some people now think he is town because of his lie. That would be the benefit. See how that works?

BTW...if anyone didn't notice...pappums lied and had us all diverting our attention to normal scumhunting.

andrew....not sure pappums is still claiming a one shot Cop because that WOULD make him a target of interest to scum. So my guess is the role and the result were both lies. If it isn't...there is no reason there can not be a non-sane cop in a mini normal. Mini's are allowed one non-standard role. I would not however think there would be a non-sane cop AND a neighborizor....because IMO that would be two non-standard roles and that would not fly.

So was your role claim a lie as well pappums? I'm asking becuase if it wasn't....then either you or Voided would still be lying about your role.

After all this lie fallout I do not think anyone is cleared and we are for the most part back to square one...other than te fact we have a confessed liar. Which in addition to my opinion towards andrew (ie in lieu of a sure thing he's a better lynch than most) I also support lynching all liars. At the point Voided hit L-1 there were 20 posts before you unvoted him. He could have very easily been lynched based on your info. You backtracking is perfectly understandable if you are scum who realized "Oh shit...once Voided is lynched and flips town...I'll be next." If you are town that just decided to lie...you've removed all credibility IMO for the rest of this game.

[havingfitz]

What scummy reasons do you refer to. You mention opposition to my "just get the lynch over with" sentiment which I had explained my rationale for somewhat in detail. Iirc I also asked you some questions regarding your suspicions which you have not answered. If you maintain suspicions on me I would appreciate you explaing how you disagreed with my suggestion. Not that it matters now since it was all based on a lie but as you still harbor those suspicions an explanation would be nice.

All of my suspicions have already been laid out, other than your aggressive tendencies but that could easily be justified as a play style, so I'd find it hardly worth discussing. I didn't mention I had a TON of reasons to find you oddly scummy, just reasons.

All your suspicions have been laid out? Looking over your ISO I see one post where you indicate any suspicion with a shred of reason towards me. Singular. One post/reason. Here it is:

Fitz,

While yes, we may not be able to gain any type of connection between Voided and his buddies now that the issue is on the table, it doesn't limit us from pressuring other scum in general on other issues, like we've been trying to do as town.

I don't like your desire to go ahead and just eliminated Voided when we still have so much of the day left to get information apart from him... :/

So it’s scummy play which I have asked you to elaborate on and reasons (plural) which you have already “posted.” Which other than the one I quote above I can not find. I find that scummy.

Then you say:

BTW...if anyone didn't notice...pappums lied and had us all diverting our attention to normal scumhunting.

I agree, this is kind of aggravating. However I don't agree with the L.A.L style of Mafia, so I can't justify lynching him just because he lied, despite how anti-town that is. I kind of understand his view, as far as trying his luck at reaction fishing. However there are better ways then this, and he could've single handedly caused a stupid lynch on perhaps a town PR, and then we'd be **** out of luck at the start of Day 2, especially if scum hit ANOTHER town PR during the night. So I WOULD be up for lynching him for the single purpose that he almost caused a lynch on someone that may or may not be scum, all because he was "reaction fishing." In fact:

UNVOTE: Xalxe

VOTE: Pappums

So you don’t agree with LAL in mafia…but you state in your ISO 11 that you don’t like his lying. Then in the quote directly above, you don’t want to lynch him for lying…but you DO want to lynch him on the basis of what COULD have happened because of his lying. Wha? That makes no sense to me. So not the act itself but the potential outcome of the act. Sounds like you want to steer clear of perceived policy lynching but you still like being on the liar’s wagon.

This is not the first time you have done a 180 in the same post. This question question that you have avoided answering up to this point came out of a similar 180. If you were so certain Voided was going to be the lynch…why did you keep your vote off him and instead maintaining it on a RV for Xalxe? I also find it odd that in the very first post after pappum’s claim…that you call him out on potentially joking. Why in the world would anyone of imagined that pappum’s claim was a joke. Are town fakeclaims on day 1 that common? [the answer btw is NO] It’s like you knew he was joking. And perhaps he was joking in the right direction and you preferred staying off Voided’s wagon. I would think a PR claim of scum (until it was confessed to be a lie) would be a lot more of an indication of one’s guilt than using as a reason the potential result from a lie…which you are now using to vote pappums.

You are avoiding my questions and not being consistent with you gameplay. I’m torn between pappum and you now. I think if pappum were to flip scum it would somewhat absolve you and Voided (though not entirely). However…if pappum were to flip town, my vote would be going straight to you (if it doesn’t before then).

[havingfitz]

Looking forward to Jerbs joining the game. Hint...you vote by typing the name of the person who you want to vote for, highlighting their name, and selecting the vote button. Rationale would be good too.

Looking forward to more input from Idiotking too. Only one post of content in which he displays the insight of knowing pappums' claim is fake. Either there's inside knowledge on IK's part or he is very intuitive in which case the more from him the better.

@Jerbs and IK...which one of you are scum?

[havingfitz]

What do you call what you did pappum? Fibbing? No...you lied. If you weren't lying please enlighten us on what is is.

And how am I rolefishing? I would like to know if your day cop claim was legit or not as that would impact Voided's claim's validity. Otherwise I'm only interested in your flip. And while if you are town you may have thought you were doing some slick gambitting...it was in fact still a lie which did in fact derail everyone else's scumhunting. So for the sake of your lone benefit (according to you) everyone else was operating/scumhunting on false premises.

[havingfitz]

Jahudo...no offense but...no shit. You're saying regardless of whether Void is town or scum....there stands a good chance that there are 2 scum out of the 5 on his wagon. Why does this theory leave out pappums? he should be a consideration as well? So that makes 2 out of 6. That's not far off what the probable ratio of scum to town is for the entire game.

And if we assume there was one scum off the wagon (and I would argue possibly two off the wagon if Void IS scum)....then you have to look at 1-2 of Voided, Jahudo, andrew, Neil, Jerbs (assuming he is still in the game), mikemike (is he still playing) and Idiotking.

So basically you're saying in your theory...there is probably scum on and off Void's wagon.

I would argue there is no guarantee there were any scum on Void's wagon given they had a claimed result on him (from possibly a townie) which was going to offer the opportunity for scum to lay back and let town do the lynch (whther it was on scum or town) without them having to join in (see neil). See how that

LIE

was a bad thing? So yeah, good stuff. Let's go with that. Not!

As for back to square one...I said for the most part. Everything that has occurred since the

LIE

will be of use D2 and beyond but it did us no good today. Which is my point. I stopped looking at anyone else (as I would assume some others did) because I believed pappum's

LIE

and figured we had confirmed scum. Now we will have to get flips on pappums and possibly Void to see how everyone's actions may have been motivated. On a non-pappum/Void note...I also have a strong feeling towards neil being scum as well for reason

s

, which unlike neil, I actually did provide.

[havingfitz]

yknow, as much as I agree that Rat set us back in the scumhunting department, you don't have to do that with the "lies". -_-

And I don't quite get the 5th paragraph.

Just pointing out that that is what they were despite pappums' illusion that they weren't. And I'm not sure I can state the 5th any clearer.

Fitz - Seems pretty jumpy- firstly attempting to get an early close to Day 1 after Rats specifically said do not quick lynch and then immediately jumping at Rat. I am kinda seeing his points re Andrew now though and not going to hold those against him. Also potentially an element of role fishing when he queried Rats in 201.

How am I jumpy? We get an investigation resulting in a guilty on voided from our ~day cop. The fact he asked for no quicklynch means nothing to me as I did not share his opinion on the matter. IMO a confirmed scum so early on D1 was better off eliminated asap. I’ve given my reason in further detail and if people don’t agree with them they are entitled to their opinions.

As for immediately jumping on pappum…I did this for a few reasons…1) My vote on Void was no longer for valid reason so I needed to unvote him. 2) My vote before I went to Voided was on pappums to begin with so without #3 it still would have probably gone back to him (pappums, and 3) pappums lied and wasted towns’ time. Yes…the days events will still be of value later on but our time would have been better served IMO looking for scum and not having our play revolve around Void guilt (which true as it might be…is deemed confirmed until the lie was confessed). And I support the LAL policy.

As for me rolefishing...wth are you talking about? I didn't ask pappum or Void to claim. pappum has said his result on Void was a lie but I do not recall whether or not he hass said his claimed role is a lie. To ask if that was a lie is not rolefishing. If that really is his role then IMO that would confirm that either pappum or Void is scum as I do not believe there would be a one shot day cop AND a neighborizor in a mini normal. I would consider both of those to be unusual roles of which we can have only one.

Well my take on it is that its pretty clear he would be drawing a big bullseye on himself by doing this. Sure he might not be lynched but if not ... there's a pretty good chance he'll be investigated which unless he's investigation proof would be the end of him.

I've a scum read on you.

-Looking to finish the day early and pushing for it
-Apparently writing off large parts of the day
-Flying onto a Rats wagon on the safe grounds of LAL

If town, surely you'd want to make the most of all info available not just launch it into the recycle bin. Whether you agree with Rats' tactics or not - there's stuff there to be used. You seem way too happy to disregard stuff that has been posted as being of no use ... you claim to have stopped looking for scum after the claim - why not look for more scum ??? Because you had your mislynch in the bag and were happy with your day's work ?

VOTE: HavingFitz

So your take is beneficial to him if he is scum. Scum would never do that. Or would they. Pappums may or may not be scum but what he is…in this instance at least…is a confirmed liar. That is enough in my book to lynch. As for there being a “good chance he is investigated”…looks who’s rolefishing now.

As for your scum reads.
1) I’ve explained this in detail and stand by it. Had pappums’ claim been legitimate IMO a quicklynch of Void would have been in the town’s best interest.
2) I’m not writing off anything. I think the time would have been better served not working under false pretenses which were introduced by pappum. And as I have mentioned…regardless of the false pretenses…the D1 events will still be of value later on.
3) How long should I have waited to vote the person I wanted lynched most? Ridiculous rationale. And you may condone lying and misleading town but I do not. Lynching liars IMO is a safe bet.

And there was no mislynch in the bag when pappums claim was still considered legitimate. If you have issues regarding the potential mislynch of Void you need to look at the cause of it…not the people who believed pappum.

[havingfitz]

@fitz

I WAS V/LA

andrew and pappaums are VIs

Welcome back. Thanks for the player assessment. Do you plan on contributing to the game? Other than pointing out VIs do you have any thoughts on what has transpired? Any suspects?

[havingfitz]

Neil...not sure why you have decided to make the game personal. "OK little boy?" "pompous jerk?" "thick skull?"

I consider unprovoked ad-hom attacks to be scummy. And I do in this case along with pappums' "dumbass" comment. When you can't converse sensibly and have to resort to base level attacks it shows you are frustrated and do not have solid ground to stand on.

I'm not going to respond to everything throughout your 2-part wall post because that would create a longer wall which I suspect many would gloss over.

I will say it's hypocritical to gripe about my using the term "us" or "we" when you use it as well. There is nowhere ITT where I have lied and your attempt to color me as such is baseless and reaching.

As for the rolefishing...I'm not sure why this doesn't get across to you, but I did not ask for anyone to claim. pappums claimed of his own free will. My question to him in regards to the claim he made was…was his claim still valid. I don't want to know if pappums is VT or any other type of PR, I want to know if his unsolicited PR claim is still valid because of its relationship IMO to Voided's claim. If you or anyone else thinks trying to confirm a claim someone has already made is rolefishing then arguing it further is pointless.

Lastly...I have pointed out two situations where you contradict yourself within the same posts. Your recent posting towards me would be example three. You begin with stating you don't believe I am scum...then you proceed to build a lengthy ~case on me where you say you have a scummy read on me. You haven't devoted that much attention or effort into the person you are voting for (for the potential result of his lie but

not

the act of lying itself ) It's kind of like the fencesitting andrew is suspecting you for.

And as much as I hate to say it, if pappums’ was found to be scum…my read on you would probably change.

[havingfitz]

Poor backtracking. You defend your ad-hom comments with more ad-hom statements. Nice. And if I’m coming across as accusing I probably am. Aren’t you accusing? Aren’t

we

all accusing at some point in this game?

… there's almost nobody here that's actually following you, you instead attempt to get questions out there by referring to the term "we" and "us." As far as I've been concerned, there are people agreeing with my reads and if they are town, they are on my side.

I don’t know if anyone is following me or not. I really don’t care. I’m stating my suspicions and questions and people can do with them what they want. I also did not realize you had people agreeing with you (aka followers?)…good job. Instead of making pronoun use a point of contention (a worthless one at that), feel free to substitute” us” or” we” with “I” the next time you get put off by my use of them.

All in all, I didn't lay out a case against you. That wasn't my point.

What? Do you even keep track of what you write? What about this….

now I have a bigger case. THIS case, I'll lay out for you and even trail the main points so that THIS time, you don't miss it.

You lied, and I've explained it in my previous posts against you.

No. I have not lied (unlike you and your case denial above). You accused me of lying by implying I have rolefished and denied it. When you explain how it is rolefishing to ask someone who has ALREADY claimed to confirm whether their claim still stands, then perhaps we’ll see where you are confused. You are also accusing me of lying in regards to my “back to square one” comment. There is no lie there either. I stand by anything I have said regarding “square one.”

Lastly, about this whole "fencesitting idea." You did not agree with Andrew did you? Please don't let it be so.

I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with andrew. His post prior to mine mentioned he thought you were fencesitting and that is how I see some of the 180’s you have done. In your ISO 10 you agree with theory regarding lynching Voided (which was to do it ASAP) and then say you want to extend the day 17 more (rl) days. You dislike that pappums lied and are voting him for the impact his lie could have had but you indict the LAL policy. You do not find me scummy and then proceed to lay out a case on me as to why I am scummy. It seems like you want to have things both ways. If fencesitting doesn’t sit well with you, consider my accusation to be for contradictory comments instead.

I’m not certain pappums is scum (nor anyone else) but his lie is the model lie for my support to the LAL in this instance. Someone pointed out that not all lies are bad for town. I can agree with that comment and I could envision some instances where a lie would not warrant a LAL sentiment. That does not apply to pappums’ lie however. His lie could have resulted in a mislynch and hypothetically…if there was a cop of some sort in the game…the lie could have forced a PR to out itself. Then there could have been two roles outted due to his lie (along with Voided’s Neighborizor claim). That is a lie worthy of a LAL IMO. And despite your aversion to LAL…in this instance your vote on pappums is a result of him lying. You’re trying to lynch a liar.

I think town would get more info from a pappum flip but I would be equally interested in seeing a neil flip. My current vote is not set in stone.

FOS neil

[havingfitz]

I also don't like the fact that neil and fitz are trolling the hell out of each other.

I haven't ever been accused of "trolling" before and I have never used the term. Can I get a definition. And nice to see you post a few times. You're almost out of lurker territory. Way ahead of Jerbs at least.

[havingfitz]

Best thing to do IMO is to just eliminate Voided and if by some chance pappums is not being truthful...lynch him. I would think everything else from this point on with respect to Voided is going to be WIFOM.

Pro-scum attitude. Even if this is your playstyle opinion, its a strategy that would benefit scum if both those players are town. You are basically advocating entering day 3 that could possibly be after two mislynches.

It was not pro-scum if pappums had been telling the truth. To have confirmed scum nailed early on Day 1 favors a quicklynch IMO. Why waste everyone's time looking for scumbuddies (who should not be stupid enough to link themselves to Voided) with what could be assumed to be an honest claim & result? My ISO 6-8 give my rational for a VM QL and I reiterate my belief that pappums has to be telling the truth in my ISO 12. I disagree that under the circumstances..if pappums had been truthful my sentiment was pro-scum. As three others did as displayed by their actions if not their comments. With the entire basis for my opinion being pappums' honesty...the fact he lied distorts any actions up to his confession as people (town at least...myself at least) were unknowingly operating on the basis of that lie.

@ all. Why did I not question pappums lie? Typically when someone claims a PR...especially early in the game...I am very hesitant to believe them. The reason I was willing to take pappums as legitimate was that he was implicating someone else and there was a way of confirming his claim. IMO there would be no way someone would falseclaim a result on another player when there was a way of proving that result. If VM were to have been lynched and turned out town...it would have been obvious (to me at least) that pappums was scum (or at the very least town not playing to the town's wincon). I had no reason not to believe pappum based on the consequences I felt he would suffer if he was not telling the truth.

Instead...he appears to be getting a pass from many of the game and instead there is a growing wagon on the person who was the most committed to believing him. At this point the only people who know whether pappums and voided are scum are scum...so how can the possibility of one and two mislynches be a negative against me (due to my actions from believing pappums' lie) when one or both of pappums could still turn out to be scum?

If we have identified scum it is in town's best interest to eliminate asap vs letting scum manipulate or assess town.

You don't ask for pappums to confirm his thoughts, or question why he is delaying, so I have trouble believing why you take pappums for his word. And why you understand tomorrow you could be lynching him. Its like you aren't worried about being duped today.

I state I assume he is telling the truth and as mentioned above...I give my rationale with my Voided vote and subsequent posts. I don't have trouble believing him because if he had turned out to be lying...it would have implicated him (pappums) as scum. Now with his admission that he lied and deceived

us

we no longer have that cut and dry (ie one of them has to be scum) situation. What we do have is at least one player we know has lied and deceived town. What's more scummy...believing another players' claim OR lying and deceiving town and coming right on the edge of what may have been a mislynch?

Your early claim was poor play and your ego at thinking you have pegged a scumbuddy based on my posts is ridiculous.

This sounds like you don't trust him, but the rest of your posting sounds like you do enough to lynch. Unless this is also a post you want to have ready in case voided flips town.

When I made this post directed at pappums (as well as now) I did not trust him. What is your point? "Sounds like I do enough to lynch?" What? I don't trust him and I am voting him. I don't understand what you are trying to say.

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

Both Cecily and havingfitz look like scum. I have town reads on xalxe, pt barnum, neil, mikemike, pappums. Idiotking is also town, but that's a gut feeling. Jinxx, Jerbs, and andrew are null reads. I'm conflicted on voided because he was put into a situation he probably wasn't used to, so he may not have been acting like himself. I want to see more of him not in the spotlight. I don't have a reason to suspect him now though.

When people are basing their play on lie...how can they be viewed as acting like themselves? If pappums doesn't lie...my vote isn't on Voided and I'm not looking to anyone for a QL.

I am against lynching all liars. Or any type of policy lynch for that matter. The fact is: both town and scum lie, lurk, and are stupid. Don't lynch someone for just one of those reasons.

---

Regarding fitz/niel. I think that neil is likely town, and that fitz could be scum. I think that the cases against him are decent, but I would rather vote for jerbs.

What cases on me do you think are decent? And why is neil not a consideration with his inconsistencies and overdefensiveness?

@VM...thanks. Not sure that describes any of my posts to neil but definitely think the term troll could apply to neil...and pappums rat for that matter.

erm fitz and ceci;y, i notice when u vote/fos neil, u neglected my case yes?

andrew...I saw your comments. Was I supposed to reference them? As usual you are posting the bare minimum and your case on neil is all of one or two lines. Not a whole lot to digest in re: to neil. I'm happy for my suspicions towards neil to stand on their own two feet.

[havingfitz]

EBWOP:

Your early claim was poor play and your ego at thinking you have pegged a scumbuddy based on my posts is ridiculous.

This sounds like you don't trust him, but the rest of your posting sounds like you do enough to lynch. Unless this is also a post you want to have ready in case voided flips town.

When I made this post directed at pappums (as well as now) I did not trust him. What is your point? "Sounds like I do enough to lynch?" What? I don't trust him and I am voting him. I don't understand what you are trying to say.

I went back to this post to try and figure out what you were talking about. I thought it had came after his confession as opposed to prior to it. My comments towards pappums were made in regards to him expressing suspicions towards me...that has nothing to do with trust...that has to do with the knowledge he is off on his read. Which would be consistent IMO with my read on his early claim (which at the time I thought was truthful) and in fact now...consistent with his crap gambit.

To clarify...I do not trust him post-confession...but pre-confession, when the quote above was taken, I did trust his fake result (for reasons already provided). I did not agree, obviously, with his read on me or the logic behind his (what I perceived as truthful) early D1 claim.

[havingfitz]

Remind me where I made a personal attack on you pappum...

[havingfitz]

So me suggesting that there's a reasonable chance Rats will be investigated is role fishing is it ? How do you figure that one out ?

As for your answers, OK fair enough but we'll have to agree to disagree - sorry but I have a scum vibe about you and the way you've played the game and reacted to stuff that has happenned (mainly the gambit and the revealing of the gambit).

If I have no way of knowing there are certain PRs/abilities in the game I do not make any inferences to their existence. I think doing so is a way of rolefishing. At the very least I would construe your comments as steering a potential invesitigative role towards pappums (assuming pappums makes it through the day)...which if he were to flip town...would also translate to the opinion you were steering the investigation towards pappums in order to avoid investigations on yourself or your buddies (assuming you were scum).

As for my reactions to the lie, fmpov my actions are perfectly reasonable given the circumstances they came under (i.e. the initial belief and the subsequent confession).

Queston re Rat, you don't trust him but is this purely down to the gambit - ie if anyone had attempted a similar gambit would you have automatically given them a scum read ?

I think my main issue with you is your immediate over-reactions, ie we have guilty on Voided quick lets end day now, Andrew is bad player quick lets policy lynch, Rats wasn't cop after all - must be scum lynch him. Probably need to get my backside in gear and read some of your previous games to see if its consistent with your meta I suppose.

He has done some other things to make me suspect him but my level of trust towards him is lower than anyone else atm due to his lie. If by similar gambit you mean...if anyone had lied a PR result on another player...brought them to the edge of a lynch...and then refuted their claim...yes, I would not trust them. And while a revealed lie may make me suspect someone more it wouldn't necessarily move them to the top of my scum list. There are gambits that would not necessarily draw the same opinion from me.

I don't see any of my actions re: the lie as over reacting. They were all based on cut and dry scenarios (though not in the order you present them):

• - andrew is going to frustrate the hell out of town and we are going to regret having him the game the further we get.
  I never advocated a quicklynch on him
  ...just a lynch on him. Has his play proven me wrong? Also...the play of others has superceded this opinion and andrew would be no higher than 4th on my list at the moment. Jerbs is making him look like an overposting beacon of mafia knowledge.
  
  -pappums got a scum result on Void and since there is no way in my mind pappums would lie...it must be true. Lets lynch Void asap for reasons already provided.
  
  - pappums admitted a lie because he realized (either as town or scum) that it could or would backfire on him. IMO scum have every reason to lie and do it throughout the game. Town have very few reasons to lie ergo pappums earns my vote.

[havingfitz]

Remind me where I made a personal attack on you pappum...

every time you have said i lied or called me a liar. i made it clear that this was a gambit, and i took every opportunity i could to ensure that vm would not get lynched, right from the very first post of the gambit.

You're hilarious. Those are not personal attacks. Lying is what you did and what you acknowledged...

i did decieve the town

once again, im sorry that i lied to you,

Better examples of personal attacks would be you calling me a 'dumbass' or accusing Jerbs of having sex with aardvaarks (?)...essentially for suspecting you. I'm not sure sex with an aardvaark could be construed as an ad-hom attack but your dumbass comment definitely is. It serves to discredit my opinion based on a personal attack and not on the merits of what I have said. You (and neil) are using them IMO because you realize you do not have a leg to stand on in your arguments against me and as a result need to undermine what I am saying with insults. When I admit to being a dumbass feel free to call me one like I am doing with your admission of lying.

It would also appear this comment regarding your lie is not accurate:

i am ready to accept your scorn and loathing,

Now you want to distance yourself from the lie/gambit by stating you are through talking about it. Well isn't that convenient. You're through talking about it. I suppose that makes sense...why would you want to continue to talk about your lie to everyone? You want to deflect everyone's (at least town's) attention from lie itself and just focus on the excellent results it produced

Let's see what those results were...

- you determined Voided's initial reaction was really bad (Question to all...wouldn't your reaction be bad if you had just been confirmed as scum when you actually weren't [assuming of course Void isn't]?)
- you were so convinced he was scum (for what credible reason I can not see) that you were willing to let your lie run it's course to a possible mislynch.
- you admit to lying yet state Void's further posting has improved his standing with you and you proceed to defend/rationalize some of his reactions/comments.
- AND then despite the fact he has come across better to you in his recent posts and you can see where some of his reactions/comments came from...you REVOTE him.

CRAP!

Then...the current net result of you masterful "gambit" is that I have come across as your top suspect. You seem to be basing the bulk of your suspicions of me on my actions which were made on the belief of your lie (which I believed). With the knowledge I have of my alignment suspicions towards me just further discredits you in my eyes. You made a bold claim with your result on Void which I was inclined to believe, you admit you lied to us, then you come after me. WTH wouldn't I think you were scum. Then the best you can do is throw insults at people.

All this despite your willingness to lynch Void on the same basis that most people generally base D1 suspicions on (hunches I would argue), your defense of him, and STILL maintaining the confidence in your hunch on him to re-vote him. (at least until you swapped to me) The only time there are better reasons to suspect someone D1 than a hunch would be in the case of a ..............wait for it.....................confirmed investigation result or a really bad and/or exposed lie. ding! ding! ding!

Also...while you had expressed suspicions of me in relation to your lie, your vote on me comes across as nothing more than OMGUS given your confidence in Void's guilt and the only issues you raise when you vote me regard policy lynches (which you yourself admit you support). More hilarity...

you want to just lynch people for supposedly being vi's (andrew) and for gambiting (me) without really talking and actually scumhunting. it isnt like i said one thing earlier in the game and then contradicted myself later (which i think is the proper basis for lal),

1) I don't support lynching gambitors...I support lynching liars (especially to the extent of yours). You call your lie a gambit. I call your lie scummy. And whether you consider your lie a contradiction or not (aren't lies typically a contradiction of the truth once they are uncovered)....the basis of LAL= a lie. I'm not pushing your lynch for contradicting yourself...I'm pushing your lynch because of your lie...and subsequent play.

tl:dr;

pappums suspects Void enough to lie about him, considers letting the lie run its course to a Void lynch, defends Voids actions and then immediately re-votes him. Then he ad-hom's me and places an OMGUS vote on me for my policy lynch comments.

BTW...I always get a kick out of people who want to lynch other players who advocate policy lynches...it's like a policy lynch loicy lynch. It's inherently hypocritical.

So what are your reasons again pappums for voting me?

[havingfitz]

Pappums said not to quicklynch.

• The fact he asked for no quicklynch means nothing to me as I did not share his opinion on the matter. IMO a confirmed scum so early on D1 was better off eliminated asap.

---

Players were talking about the possibility of a gambit. The timing of his claim was in question. Those should be reasons to not blindly follow pappums to a hammer. At least to question pappums and get him to explain his thoughts more.

People mention the possiblity it was a gambit after I had voted (not that it really mattered IMO) and in fact...two who mentioned the possibility of it being a gambit laid down voided votes in the same post. His claim timing was rightfully questioned but that does not take away the fact he had made a claim and there was no getting out of it...either he would be found to be telling the truth (good for town) or he would be caught in a lie and lynched (good for town). I was not following him blindly (as I assume the other pappums voters would echo in their cases)...he was making a claim that could be proven with 100% certainty. I'll pursue 100% certainty in this game any day.

---

You say there's no point in trying to search for scumbuddies in that situation, but what is the harm in keeping the day open until everyone has at least reacted to the claims?

We can disagree but I have made my opinion on this fairly clear as shown by a few of my comments on it:

• Assuming he is telling the truth (which I believe he is) it is coming so early in the day that Voided's scum buddies will not do anything to link themselves to him. So we have essentially lost the ability to gather potentially good interations between scum partners. Best thing to do IMO is to just eliminate Voided and if by some chance pappums is not being truthful...lynch him. I would think everything else from this point on with respect to Voided is going to be WIFOM.

  everything to do with your finding on voided from this point on is going to be WIFOM and do town no good. And the longer the day goes before we do lynch voided the more time town has to screw itself over....more so IMO than scum does.

  The more town run's around with it's head cut off as to what is or isn't the best move with Voided and who is or isn't his potential scumbuddies...the more benefit there is to scum IMO. If anyone disagrees with this train of thought I would like to hear your reasons why. To start day 2 off at 2 scum and 9 town (assuming 3 scum and 10 town now) should be reward enough. In this situation (pappum's result) I see continued discussion as a negative.

---

So have you never seen a gambit in one of these games?

I have seen gambits. I have not seen a gambit (iirc) where one player claimed a guilty result on another player. Why? That would be suicide if the claimant was not telling the truth. A few of my thoughts on pappums' claim before he confessed:

• until we have a voided flip I am inclined to believe your investigation.

  why should we not believe pappum's claim? What would be his incentive to not tell the truth? I believe the different possibilities have already been covered well enough and there aren't any good ones I can see that involve pappum lying.

  there is no non-suicidal reason for pappum to fakeclaim a result on you

@pappums

...in addition to my questions to you in my post prior to this one, here's another one - Have you ever gambitted in a game before and if so, did the gambit implicate someone else?

@all

...have any of you ever been in a game where a player fakeclaimed a result on another player? If so could you provide a link?

---

But you did acknowledge that his early claim was poor play, and yet you were eager to stay on the voided wagon. How was it not enough to make you at least distrustful enough to unvote, wait for everyone to react to the claim, and ask for a role confirmation from pappums?

Why wouldn't I want to stay on the Voided wagon....as mentioned by more than a few (and reiterated again and again and again by me)...there was no good reason to not believe pappums claim because it either was or wasn't the truth. Either way we were on the road to finding scum. That's why I was secure enough in my vote to maintain it. Role confirmation would come with the flip.

[havingfitz]

Sorry, I don't have time to go through all of these new posts... fitz's walls are annoyingly huge. I might find time to post tonight though.

equally, your contribution of posts/content is annoyingly small.

---

So havingfitz believed pappums' claim without adequately exploring any other possibilities. A symptom of that was is wish to have a quicklynch of voided. Why should a claim made under suspicious circumstances lead to a quicklynch, particularly on D1 when there is hardly any information anyway? There really isn't a good reason.

What other possibilities needed exploring? Look above for my rationale on a quicklynch. In my experience a result on someone is cut and dry. Especially on D1. If we were in MYLO or LYLO I would not have been as quick to believe pappums. How was the claim made under suspicious circumstances? pappums has basically outted scum or revealed himself as scum. I will say the fact you were inclined to not believe pappums' claim regardless of whether it proved true or not seems like setting yourself up by conveniently not suspect pappum regardless of Void's possible lynched and flip outcome. So if Void were to have flipped town, you can avoid suspecting pappums for a revealed lie....and if Void were to have flipped scum...you set yourself to suspect pappums despite him having told the truth. Translation: if/when pappums is lynched, if he flips scum you have risen on the list of his possible scum buddies.

Then, immediately following pappum's revelation that it was a gambit, fitz freaks out and attacks pappums,

claiming that he (who fitz claimed probably wasn't lying and as such was probably town) is lying scum.

This turnaround is so absolute and happened so quickly that I doubt it could ever be topped.

How do I freak out and attack pappums? He admitted to lying, I found his lie suspicious, he is my top suspect and therefore has my vote. regarding the bolded bit above...WTH are you talking about? Are you saying you suspect me because I am being inconsistent by changing my opinion that someone who was probably telling the truth is lying scum? Are you forgetting about the bit where pappums actually admitted to lying? <headshake>

My turnaround was "absolute" because pappums admitted to lying and, once again...what is quick about my turnaround? Is quickness a scum tell?

Is posting a crap case on someone a scumtell?

I think this post by IK would be a good one to reflect on in D2.

There are too many people not posting in this game.

[havingfitz]

The dealy-o...

all right folks, here's the dealy-o. to believe that i am scum, you would have to believe that scum would be willing to pull a suicidal move like that

and

at the same time repeatedly tell people not to mislynch

and

tell everyone your pm said you were sane (giving you no option to claim that your sanity was not assured after the supposed vm townflip).

WIFOM.

Why would town lie to the rest of town, for a PR to claim and possibly draw out a real cop if one existed, implicate someone who could be town as scum, consider letting possible town be lynched based on gut, and then base the

only

scumhunting they (pappums) has attempted on that lie?

to believe havingfitz is scum, you would need to believe scum would want to policy lynch someone who he claims is a vi, thereby bringing about a shorter day without any real scumhunting (which is good for scum)

Misrep.

andrew's play has spoken for itself and I did not advocate a ql of him. Anyone who says I did is lying as well (as pappums).

and

endorse quicklynching vm after a suspicious early day one claim without scumhunting (once again, good for scum)

Your lie put a

temporary

stop to my scumhunting (one of the reasons I object to your lie) and in case no one has noticed...I have stated my case for ql'ing Voided.

and

endorse lynching someone for using a gambit under the pretense of lynch all liars without scumhunting (are we seeing a trend, here?).

There are no pretenses...you lied. You deceived town to the brink of lynching someone whose alignment you had no idea of. LAL is not the only reason I support your lynch (other reasons below).

the whole point of my gambit was to see the reactions people would have to there being

a confirmed scum

cornered, and then after the gambit was lifted people could scumhunt by looking for suspicious reactions.

Quit calling your lie a gambit. It was a lie. The result of your lie was that it led more than a few townies (myself obviously included) to believe we had, in your own words....

a confirmed scum.

havingfitz has made every attempt to make this day shorter than it should be, which is antitown and scummy.

Misrep.

What is "every attempt?" I supported a quick end of the day when the prevailing info supported Voided as scum. I did not advocate a quick end to the day before OR after your lie.

the fact is that havingfitz has done no real scumhunting at all, and has been avoiding doing so all day.

Misrep.

I have made a case on you. I have presented suspicions towards neil and IK and to a much lesser degree mikemike. Who have you provided supicions against? Who have you scumhunted? The sum product of your effort so far is a lie and a push towards a mislynch.

Why is pappums the best choice for a lynch?
- The

only indisputable fact we have in this game

is that pappums lied and deceived town. (scummy)
- Repeatedly ignoring accusations and question towards him. (scummy)
- Misrepping/overexagerrating to pad a weak case. (scummy)
- Ad-hom attacks in lieu of rational debate. (scummy)
- AtE with "moar votes plz." Maybe if he had said "pretty plz" he would be moar convincing?

[havingfitz]

I can't argue with IK...his name says it all. He is either being very lazy or obtuse. Or he is scum which I am starting to believe. Your recent points on me do not hold any water and I will save town from another wallpost (this time) as I have made my points to all your accusations already I believe. Speaking of not holding water...

---

@Jahudo...this comment, "You trusted pappums. You are scum." is absurd. I trusted pappums because he was in a cut and dry position that was provable. Now he is in a cut and dry position in that he lied to town. And why does your ~formula not apply to the others who put their vote on Void after pappums' lie?

What does it matter what gambits I have seen? I stated I have not seen any like pappums'. Does it matter that I have seen people claim PGO on D1 to avoid night actions (both as town and scum)? I have obviously seen scum fakeclaim PRs...usually to no avail. I have also seen town make dreadful PR claims which usually resulted in their lynching (when caught), some of which have forced the real PRs to counterclaim and out themselves. None which implicated another player that I recall though.

Of the gambits you have provided, the Karma game was a good example but is not like this game in that 1 ) it occurred on the 3rd day when players had had a chance to assess/form opinions on each other and 2) ABR allowed his claim to result in a lynch (which he got lucky with). Karma was similar to this game in that two players immediately (blindly?) laid down votes following ABR's fake claim. No gambit talk or anything...and the voters were town.

The 2nd game you provide (which is ongoing so I am hesitant to discuss too much) was a similar "gambit" in that it occurred D1 (albeit later in the day) but was different in that two players were implicated...so there was still debate to be made. I would not have advocated a ql in this case. It should also be noted that votes were immediately cast as a result of the gambit, it only went on for 7-8 hrs, the gambitor somehow knew his targets alignment (??he called them both town??) AND the person suspected as a result of the gambit and lynched D1 was town. I also note that you and pappums are in that game.

As for the 3rd game...which I note you are in...if the fakeclaim I think you are referring to is correct...it was that someone else was town. Hardly the type of vote that would immediately produce a lynch so not relevant to this game. If your were referring to a different fakeclaim in this game please feel free to point it out.

The fact is though...I have not been in a game where town fakeclaimed a PR that implicated someone else as scum and was therefore easily proven.

Also...has anyone been in a game where given the result of a lynch...a town entering MYLO immediately conducted a No-lynch without discussion (ie a ql)? That was the same effect I was proposing with our post-lie/pre-confession ~confirmed scum Void.

---

@cecily. What? IK and pappums cases on me are pathetic. Please state yours after you have read theirs and my responses. And why do you state you think pappums is not scum and then follow that up by discrediting his 'gambit' plan? That makes no sense as does (not) your vote on me. Please state your case. If you are lazy time-consumed town, do town a favor and replace out. Otherwise play to your wincon (which if you are scum you are doing well atm).

[havingfitz]

IK...I didn't pick your name. Feel free to say I'm having fits.

I have 5 people voting me, 4 of whom (sans Cecily) have made some effort to present cases which are basically regurgitating some or all of the same main points. In summary (and if I am leaving anything out...anyone can feel free to add):

- Early PL statements re: andrew
- Belief of pappums' lie
- Push to q/l Void
- Switch to pappums' wagon after he confessed and/or supporting LaL

I have addressed each of these points at least once and most likely several times. ISO me.

Everything else is iirc is based on opinion and WIFOM of how both pappums and I would or wouldn't act as town or scum....conjecture.

IDK who is or isn't town or scum. The only thing I do know is that pappums lied, derailed genuine scumhunting, and is pushing a mislynch based on his lie. I have also provided additional suspicions of me for anyone actually reading the game.

You are scum because the case you have presented is crap and I'm confident you could do better if you tried...if a case actually existed. I responded to your first accusations you made with your vote. Your second post of accusations was even worse and primarily (if not completely) based on your opinion and WIFOM.

[havingfitz]

P.T.....if a boring wagon is a bad wagon, then by all means, my wagon is boring.

I agree Jerbs has done squat so far but that is a poor reason for anyone to be voting him (especially now that he has decided to replace out). Pointing out a town-like post by him would be hard to do given the amount he has contributed but alternatively, is there anything really scum-like in his gameplay (or lack thereof)? I have a null read on him and would not support his lynch ATT. Especially given all the events that have transpired today.

The willingness to vote Jerbs to avoid a replacement is very scummy IMO.

My top four ATM are pappums rat (reasons already provided in ample detail); Idiotking for pushing a very bad case on me, neil [only if pappums flips town], and Cecily for her last post [aka her recent ridiculous vote on me and the associated rationale???].

[havingfitz]

Lol if you say so Mike and Fitz. Just remember, Fitz is in danger of being lynched, it's only right that he pulls something out against somebody who has called him out as a viable lynch candidate.

Touchy much? Just because by some miracle you do not have a competitive wagon at the moment does not mean you are concensus town and immune from suspicion. If can you admit that your willingness to vote on someone simply because they are being replaced can be found scummy...then what is scummy about people pointing that out? But thanks for pointing out under the immense pressure you are facing that you are town. That's good to know.

And why are people (neil and IK to name at least 2) using 'quickness' as a negative? Is an action deemed quick based on the amount of RL time it takes to react on the number of posts it takes an individual to act? I'll answer for you....neither. It's not a scum tell. If some of you are slooooooooow to form an opinion, take a stance, make a vote, whatever...so be it. Town is as entitled to promptly posting their take/actions on things. <headshake>

---

@pappums...why take the time to craft such a well played and productive lie (aka gambit for those still catching up) and then basically be a

non-entity the past week?

I have responded to numerous posts by you, asked you questions, made accusations based on my suspicions, and you ignore them and simply say I'm obvscum. Here they are to save you your precious time:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p2887913
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p2891977
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p2892207

---

@cecily. What? IK and pappums cases on me are pathetic.

Please state yours after you have read theirs and my responses. And why do you state you think pappums is not scum and then follow that up by discrediting his 'gambit' plan? That makes no sense as does (not) your vote on me. Please state your case.

If you are lazy time-consumed town, do town a favor and replace out. Otherwise play to your wincon (which if you are scum you are doing well atm).

Well??????????

Also...regarding your post 329, let me see if I have this right:

You voted neil because of his attacks on others (being disrespectful...ad-hom'ing) and unvoted him because he stopped. ????? Is that what you are saying? Awesome logic. So if someone does something scummy but stops...it's ok. And since he didn't believe me to be scum [Note to Cecily...have you noticed who neil's 2nd ranked lynch candidate is?] in the first place, it's ok that he resorted to names. Yer guuuud.[/sarcasm]

And thanks for explaining your vote. In summary, it appears you are voting me because:

1) My "unwillingness to let the gambit go as simply a way to provoke everyone to talk about things." Annnnd,
2) that I am "so opposed to it [discussion] that he's [me] attacking the one [PR] who started the conversations in the first place."

I would counter those points with:

1) I'm unwilling to let it go because it forms the basis for my suspicions of PR. It is not the only reason my vote is still on him.
2) Are you saying scum can't do things to provoke discussion? Ridiculous. And you are saying I am voting pappums because I do not like discussion and I am holding it against him? That is a faulty analogy. I would also note that you have not mentioned one word of suspicions towards me (that I can find) until the post you decide to vote for me. Despite at various points suspecting Voided (and keeping your vote on him for a few days after the lie was confessed), neil (for saying mean things) and out of nowhere...me. And what was your main reason for voting me again? For being against discussion:

that said I don't think we need to wait the entire continuation of this day unless someone is going to admit to being scum, and I think it would be more useful to learn if Voided is actually scum or not

before continuing on with deliberations over who his buddies are. We can always come back and re read these pages tomorrow, and knowing explicitly who is lying would definitely be better than throwing random guesses around.

What? But.....b-b-b-but,

Pushing a quicklynch without much information is very scummy.

I call bullshit on you Cecily. I'm committed to pappums att because today looks like its him or me, but whoever among town is still here tomorrow needs to string you up. IK can get in line behind you.

---

TO...350+ posts in this game and I'm the person you find most scummy (for using

EMPHASIS

)? Please do town a favor and replace out.

[havingfitz]

^^ flailing scum.

and i have either already answered the questions in your impossible to read wall posts or they are completely worthless questions to be answering in the first place.

^^Uninterested/lazy scum/town. Way to keep up the level of effort there pappum.

[havingfitz]

TO...350+ posts in this game and I'm the person you find most scummy (for using

EMPHASIS

)? Please do town a favor and replace out.

It's not because you used emphasis, it's because your overall reaction to the reveal of the gambit/lie seemed entirely

too

emotional. You reacted more than I would expect someone to react naturally in a forum game, and that does not indicate town to me.

especially the enlarged and bolded LIES

So town are calm and collected. Scum aren't. Got it.

[havingfitz]

fuck you

i dont need walls to convey what i am trying to say. all your walls do is add alot of rehashed bullshit to make it seem like you have more to say than you do.

Nice...language like that might force Cecily to bus you.

Considering all the discussion and scumhunting you advocate you have done amazingly little of both.

[havingfitz]

TO...350+ posts in this game and I'm the person you find most scummy (for using

EMPHASIS

)? Please do town a favor and replace out.

It's not because you used emphasis, it's because your overall reaction to the reveal of the gambit/lie seemed entirely

too

emotional. You reacted more than I would expect someone to react naturally in a forum game, and that does not indicate town to me.

Since you are big on normal reactions TO...how do you like pappums little hissy

[havingfitz]

So town are calm and collected. Scum aren't. Got it.

This is correct. However, the inverse is also true. Town are also emotional and passionate, where scum generally aren't. Sound like a contradiction? It kind of is. But when you think of it from scum's perspective, it makes perfect sense. What's the goal of scum? To

fake

blending in. Real, genuine emotion and passion are

hard

to fake. They usually stick out and smell funny when they try. Scum generally ride the moderate emotional scale, trying not to let anything slide but not over-reacting to anything...unless they think they're

supposed

to over-react.

You do realize I was being sarcastic I hope (I believe you do).

Just as I hope everyone realizes that there are no reactions, comments, scenarios that are explicitly/guaranteed townie or scummy. If they were the game would be a lot less complicated (for some at least).

[havingfitz]

I'd be satisfied with a Fitz lynch, though I haven't put the effort into his case that I have with PR.

Par for the course/this game.

[havingfitz]

Fitz playing the "look who's Neil second lynch candidate is" card is not fair to myself. You and Pappums are both the only real viable lynches of the day, so you two were included because of that. I said I'd rather see Pappums go then you, because I'm more confident in that lynch then yours. I was not saying you out of EVERYONE is my second guess to being scum.

On the defense again and my comment wasn't even directed at you. What was not fair about my comment? You said:

My vote is Pappums, Fitz, Jerbs in the order of first to last as far as who I feel most comfortable lynching.

I was simply pointing that out as an inconsistency of Cecily's in my response to her terrible post explaining her ~reasons for voting me. If you have people you suspect more than me they should be on your comfortable lynching list. Would you rather lynch me than whoever your #2 suspect is? Your #3? etc etc?


Awfully quiet day. Anyone have any thoughts on my 'case' on Cecily? On pappums coming unglued for no good reason? (At least that wasn't an ad-hom attack...good job PR)

[havingfitz]

First of all...a little reminder:

Why is pappums the best choice for a lynch?
- The

only indisputable fact we have in this game

is that pappums lied and deceived town. (scummy)
- Repeatedly ignoring accusations and question towards him. (scummy)
- Misrepping/overexagerrating to pad a weak case. (scummy)
- Ad-hom attacks in lieu of rational debate. (scummy)
- AtE with "moar votes plz." Maybe if he had said "pretty plz" he would be moar convincing?

Add to these his lack of contribution the last week+ and his coming unglued for IMO no good reason.

---

To my new #2 suspect (who I would switch my vote to now if I thought it would result in her lynch). I would invite town to look over her posts and see what little she has contributed (not the amount of posting but the content). Look not so much at her reasons for voting Void and neil (neither of which I had an issue with) but rather for her vote changes.

After pappums' lie is confessed Cecily says she still finds VM suspicious and thanks him [PR], proclaiming he [PR] is now

"pretty much cleared"

in her book. She then chooses to let her vote linger on VM.
When she does move her vote off VM and on to neil...its for neil's language, though she makes no mention of no longer suspecting VM. Also, no suspicions of neil were mentioned prior to her vote so I would assume her only suspicion was his language. I would ask people to note that she voted neil in post 235.
Then without any previously voiced suspicions of me, Cecily decides to vote me. She determines neil no longer warrants her vote becuase

since he [neil] has claimed that he never actually believe fitz to be scum I feel like I can overlook the names as just a shift of character, and not as a scummy move.

The trouble with this logic is that neil stated he didn't think I was scum both before (post 223) and after (post 230) his ad-hom attacks. Her vote on neil came AFTER he had already stated he thought I was not scum. So how can she vote him and unvote him for things he did prior to her vote on him????? For those not paying attention...Cecily's post 235 came after neil's posts 223 and 230. So how is this contradiction not obvious Cecily?

Then Cecily tapdances around her vote on Voided:

Yeah, fitz I'll admit I was all for lynching voided when everyone thought he was scum because everyone else was just as down. I was willing to do it because it would have helped us actually understand what was going on. That was before pappums admitted to gambitting.

First off Cecily...when do you think I was pushing for Voided's quicklynch? BEFORE pappums admitted lying to us! That's when. How does that make your and my actions any different? Are you even thinking about what you are posting???? I've given my reasons for wanting an early D1 scum result to have a quicklynch. You were just as quick to vote him and echoed my sentiments with this comment:

I don't think we need to wait the entire continuation of this day unless someone is going to admit to being scum, and I think it would be more useful to learn if Voided is actually scum or not before continuing on with deliberations over who his buddies are. We can always come back and re read these pages tomorrow, and knowing explicitly who is lying would definitely be better than throwing random guesses around.

But now you deceide to hold it against me.

Now that pappums has come clean with his intentions I am no longer certain and I know that nothing other than night will come out of quicklynching. You still seem to think that killing someone is the best course of action. It isn't and trying to push it is scummy.

He "came clean" with his ~intentions 10 days ago, before you voted neil. So why are my actions with regard to pappums' lie (which your comments/actions were in line with) all of a sudden voteworthy? I have not advocated any sort of quicklynch since pappums "came clean" so if you are inferring that you would be misrepping me. If you aren't inferring that then why are you voting me? And of course I think lynching someone [scum] is the best course of action...isn't that the object of the game? Trying to push a lynch is scummy? I guess that makes ten of us scummy by the current votecount.

Don't quote me out of context, because I promise it will not work, I will call you on it, and it's making you look like you're flailing.

The only reason it looks like a contradiction is because the situation has changed.

I am not flailing....I'm pointing out what is blatently clear. Feel free to call me on it and show me where I'm in error,

---

While I am at it....nice to note scum #3 [IK] is "blindly" defending pappums.

I can not lay out all three of their inconsistencies/cases any more clearly.

tl:dr;

pappums is scum; Cecily's last two posts were terrible...make absolutely no sense, and are full of contradiction and hypocrisy; and IK is scum.

[havingfitz]

So, fitz, pretty much right now you're regurgitating what my actions were and calling them scummy. Thanks, but I'd like to leave it up to everyone else how they view what I've been claiming.

By regurgitating do you mean the quotes from you that prove your contradictions and hypocrisy? What's wrong with that?

How is me stating that I voted him because it would have helped us know what was going on tap dancing? I wasn't avoiding my reasons for voting him. Those were my reasons, I clearly stated them before pappums came clean, and I'm not going to go back and try and change that.

No...but last thing you said in your ~explanation for voting me was

"Pushing a quicklynch without much information is very scummy. And that's why I'm voting fitz."

Which is hypocritical considering you were advocating the same thing I was.

You were pushing a quicklynch on voided before pappums claimed, as was I because when no scum is willing to associate himself with voided it's pointless to try and drag it out. All that would get us is pissed off townies and less helpful information than we started with.

What is your point? This is what I have been pointing out to everyone and it supports my comments just above. ????

I'm calling you out on your obscene willingness to lynch pappums now. You've been jumping around pointing at pappums saying he's scum, he's scum, but all you've been focused on is his gambit. The rest of us are over it, moved on to something more worthwhile - the stuff that came out of his gambit. And you are sitting on something that you know to be a safe platform to lynch from. You're using his gambit as an excuse for his lynch which would be fine if there weren't other people who looked scummier.

What is obscene about wanting to vote someone? That's the point. I do think pappums is scum. I have not focused only on pappums lie (which you immediately absolved him of and cleared him for it)...if you have been paying attention I have pointed out several other suspicions I have on pappums. Nice misrep. And I have looked at other players (ironic you haven't noticed).

Notice how the rest of us have pretty much gotten over his gambit and are now on to making claims based on people reactions to it. You aren't. Because steering yourself to a topic other than his gambit is dangerous, because as soon as you relieve him of that guilty claim there is nothing else to go on. I am past his claim, and I see something else... you.

Still a MISREP. You're repeating yourself. See my last comment above.

And I will call you on contorting my quotes. One was taken from before pappums came out, and the other was after. As I have clearly stated my intentions do differ between those times and so quoting both times and trying to draw the same conclusions out of them is ludicrous.

You aren't doing anything other than saying you are calling me out. Which comments am I taking out of context or out of order? Not the neil unvote quotes...those are there for all to see. Which quotes do you refer to?

Let me make myself perfectly clear. I do not hold your vote on voided against you. I do not hold your willingness to quicklynch voided against you. I

do

hold you unwillingness to accept pappums gambit as simply a gambit against you.

It wasn't a gambit against me....it was a lie against voided that could have resulted in a potential mislynch and it is not what I am focusing on. And as for not holding my VM vote against me....what are you referring to in the

quote

I italicised earlier in this post? <headshake>

I completely agree with the frustration pappums felt that led him to quoting cee lo green. Seriously. And claiming that he said it out of anything other than sheer frustration will lead me to ask what kind of life you've been living that you've never wanted to express those feelings and how can I get in on it?

Et tu Cecily? So essentially you are telling me the same thing pappums rat did but in a checken shit manner. Just say it. Coupled with all your apologies to

us

for this and that you are trying too hard not to offend/annoy. And do you really feel the need to act that way (like cee lo) based off pressure from one person (moi)? Shame. If you feel the urge to curse others out for gameplay on a mafia site I can only hope your life improves and you eventually get over it.

So why were you voting me again?

[havingfitz]

So who do you consider scum at this moment, fitz? Besides pappums and me, I mean.

You're joking...right? 'Cause you made me laugh

[havingfitz]

IK...

1) Every plays differently. There is no always right method. To say so just makes you feel better in justifying your weak points towards me.
2) I have expressed suspicions towards neil as well but the points I have towards him pale compared to my top three. There is no reason that 3 scum could not be on my wagon. I am not presumptuous enough to think I have caught three scum but the three I am targetting the most are the people I suspect the most.
3) Nice ad-hom.

[havingfitz]

Alarmingly after reading 385, I'm kinda finding myself agreeing with my chief suspect Fitz regarding Cecily as well.

That's two posts in a row you've agreed with me. You're getting better. Now if you can just put down the WIFOM and vote PR (pick any of the several reasons I've provided) we'll be getting somewhere.

[havingfitz]

lol at pappums still not doing anything. You ask me for information yet you continue to avoid my recent questions/accusations towards you? Try this, ISO me and seach for idiotking or IK. My wallposts are answering questions, responding to accusations, or pointing out comments/actions I find suspicious. Stop slacking and contribute. Maybe you could start with what your case was on me again? Or reply to my recent posts directed at you.

---

TO...your rationale for suspecting me coupled with your willingness to accept PR's "fuck you" comment is ridiculous. Why would you have made a similar comment towards me? He is my top suspect (though I have provided info on others) and I am

pressuring

him. Is pressuring your top suspect a scumtell? And lets say I'm town....just envision it.....why would I not be more inclined to suspect those pushing my mislynch for what I consider FMPOV to be poor reasons? And my reasons provided in my suspicions towards others are not "Because you are voting me"...I've provided specific examples for pappum AND Cecily and to a lesser degree, IK. IMO you are not bringing anything to this game atm. Please try harder.

---

Jahudo is not making any sense with his unwillingness to acknowledge valid suspicions towards Cecily and pappums and now FOSing someone who actually is making sense with their reads.

---

@void....I can see why a pappum town flip would direct attention towards me. I would hope if he were to flip town that my reasons for voting him stood on their own merit. He has provided plenty of valid suspicions for consideration...if we get it wrong...*it happens. Regardless of his flip however I would say Cecily is still a top lynch candidate tomorrow.

---

@pappums again. Did someone say you thought you were cleared because of your lie? Also,

the only reason i am still in this one is because havingfitz is still alive.

So if I'm lynched you're going to replace out? That's nice...I assume you just want to stick around to make some assinine comment if I am today's lynch and then you'll bail (since I would no longer be in the game).

---

Gambiting isn't scummy when it's on D4 to protect a power role or to get known scum lynched. Done on D1 in order to get someone who (at the time) was a total null read is remarkably scummy.

DING! DING! DING!!!! QFT.

[havingfitz]

Jahudo is not making any sense with his unwillingness to acknowledge valid suspicions towards Cecily and pappums and now FOSing someone who actually is making sense with their reads.

Why are my suspicions against Cecily invalid?

Upon further ISO, no, they aren't invalid...I just did not recall them. You made them a week and a half ago and left it at that. She did not even warrant an FOS for basically similar things you are voting me for, yet you feel Pine's play does warrant an FOS. That seems a bit off to me. A lot has been said since you voiced your three suspicions and you have had very little to say. Any thoughts on my recent posts re: Cecily? Is Pine more suspicious in your opinion than Cecily? What's up?

[havingfitz]

TO...what are the valid reason you have/agree with to suspect me?

I do not think my way is the only correct way. I get it wrong all the time and am fine acknowledging that. If the only problem I had with PR was his lie I probably would have moved on to Cecily by now but pappums post-lie play has only added to my suspicions. As for my little digs at others...I am not a patient person...with the game or with players. If people aren't contributing or I don't agree with them I let them know it. I know what my alignment is so I know who is on the right path with their vote and suspicions and if the walls of commentary I have supplied defending my actions/opinions aren't sufficient enough to enlighten them...my frustrations could raise to the surface. I also don't have a lot of patience for people who don't contribute (ex: andrew pl comments early in the game). It's not a tell as it's how I play. And I was betrayed...I believed pappums lie. I was annoyed and unamused when he came clean.

[havingfitz]

@mikemike...pappums lie is only part of the reason he has my vote. Are there people who are voting him simply based on his lie? Are you voting me based on that assumption?

[havingfitz]

@pappums again. Did someone say you thought you were cleared because of your lie? Also,

the only reason i am still in this one is because havingfitz is still alive.

So if I'm lynched you're going to replace out? That's nice...I assume you just want to stick around to make some assinine comment if I am today's lynch and then you'll bail (since I would no longer be in the game).

[havingfitz]

I wouldn't support a pl on andrew at this point. IMO there are at least three stronger candidates for a lynch. He is playing the way he always plays (hence my initial pl question) but not now.

pappums...whatever your question is I have already answered it in my earlier posts and I believe at least one other owner has mentioned/quoted it. You might actually have to look.

[havingfitz]

Cecily...you are ignoring my case against you and my clarification of the points I made towards you. Your entire last response to me was a piece of work any slimey politician would be proud to spout

[havingfitz]

VM...I haven't hurled insults at PR, please don't say I have.

---

pappums rat...I have answered your questions. Stop being a lazy waste. And if your mother knew you were acting like you have been she would probably not let you on the computer. The answers to your questions are in my posts. At the bottom of the page is a box that says "All users." Click the arrow pointing down, select havingfitz, and hit go. There you will find your answers.

---

Pine...I don't like the fact that you "see the wagon on Fitz" and I am your "moderately-distant" second yet you are voting PR for all (or a subset of) the same reasons I am. And while you understand and are fine with my wagon, Cecily has passed me as your second highest suspect...is that accurate? What are your thoughts on neil?

Speaking of your reasons for voting pappums, you say "I'd be satisfied with a Fitz lynch, though I haven't put the effort into his case that I have with PR."....did you ever put a case together on me? If so...can I see it? Also...I think stating you put effort into a pappums case might be a bit of an overstatement. Aside from reading what others have said about him, what original thought/suspicion with respect to pappums have you produced?

You also say "Town are also emotional and passionate, where scum generally aren't." How does this comment correlate to pappums rude, irrational, out of line, and some might say..."emotional and passionate" behavior?

---

I don't care for the way pappums has played in this game. When I thought he was telling the truth during his 'gambit' I thought he had claimed a result too soon (ie he tainted gameplay). Lesson learned...next time I will consider the possibility of a gambit being in play. Then when he admitted to deceiving and lying to town, kept his vote on VM (despite no good reason att) and his subsequent OMGUS vote on me, it only supported my opinion that he was either scum or just incompetant town. However, the possibility that he is incompetant town has me bothered. I would like him to be gone because of his bad play and the fact he is being a dick (if that's hurling an insult so be it...it's also a fact). However....if he is town...then both leading wagons are on a mislynch and there will IMO be nothing to be gained from analyzing either of our wagons. I'm all for making scum work for their mislynches so I'm going to

Unvote

pappums and put my vote somewhere I feel more confident of the result...

VOTE: Cecily

If the result is my lynch...fine, I'll be out of the way and town can assess my wagon. If if the lynch is pappums and he is scum...great! But if he is town, it will be seven players other than me who can be scrutinized. I would already be a popular candidate based on my current wagon so not being on a potential PRtown lynch would just put more scum in the spotlight. And if is isn't obvious from what I am saying above...I am saying I am town-aligned.

[havingfitz]

@Pine...you stated in a fairly recent post that Cecily was the #1 target for D2. So why isn't she your #2 on D1? And if she is the to target for D2...are you assuming both pappum and I to be gone by D2? Or are you assuming the flip of whomever the D1 lynch is will exonerate the other?

With regard to the one contribution towards pappum that you take credit for...the logic behind why his gambit/lie could have come from scum was discussed at least once before you made your "effort."

Looking forward to your case on me. I'll wait till then to consider the "you suspect pappum for the same reasons as I do" train of thought.

And while neil is lower on my suspect list than a handful of others atm, I still find it interesting that you are willing to dismiss him for "glaring, screaming town tells" (which I read as things scum wouldn't do OR things that only or most of the time town would do) when you are not willing to do the same with pappum's lie (ie scum wouldn't do that which is why scum would do that). As for your psychology lesson...what good does it do? It's just taking up space. It appears you are just saying scum try to look like town. Well thanks for that revelaton.

What's up Bub and Jahudo?

[havingfitz]

@Pine...I had a post dedicated almost entirely to you that seems to have gone unnoticed. No comment?

@All...Cecily's vote on pappum is another mark on her list of suspicions IMO. As far as I can see she has avoided any kind of push on pappum until now and overlooked his lie and rude behavior. Now that he is walking out on us, and now that it looks like a few of the people who are not voting him (PT and TO) appear to be leaning towards his [PRs] wagon...she decides to hop on.

I do not see where Cecily ever adequately responded to my suspicions towards her and she gives as her reason for voting me as my

"emotonal response to pappums' gambit."

Huh? Then you end the point with saying you were

only agreeing with his [PRs] reasons for voting"

me. WTF? Was pappums voting me for being emotional? I don't recall ever getting a good reason from pappums on his vote of me. If he wasn't voting me for being emotional, and you agree with his reasons, then why do you say you were voting me for being emotional? That doesn't make sense.

And if emotion is the only thing you are basing your votes on...are you just going to keep switching back and forth between whomever gets (in your opinion at least)...emotional? I don't actually think anyone would do that and I only point it out because that's how your post is coming across to me and it's ridiculous.

Everytime you take the time to post I like my vote on you better. Even if you do feel the need to continually apologize

[havingfitz]

And did we lose Bub?

[havingfitz]

I do not see his play immediately prior to your switch to him being much different then his play for most of the day. So yes...it is an issue to me.

The only group I have placed you in is scum. I didn't 'automatically' do anything (aside from my Void vote and subsequent PR vote of course).

[havingfitz]

Good stuff IK....thanks for playing.

Where's the hubbub Bub?

Does Nacho know he replaced in?

<sigh>

[havingfitz]

Tick tock...just over 3 days until the deadline.

[havingfitz]

Tick tock...just over 3 days until the deadline.

This day seems like it has lasted forever but....

does andrew's replacement impact the deadline?

as of right now, don't count on the deadline changing.

[havingfitz]

Thanks IK...you come in and make two posts full of excuses but nothing helpful (IMO). Nothing helpful that is other than the fact you show you have been lurking but can manage a post when your name is mentioned, and yet you still don't actually post anything. Like I said...thanks

So time permitting...(ie before someone is lynched or this Sunday) your thoughts on anyone other than me would be good. Cecily. Pine. Anyone.

[havingfitz]

Sorry for getting prodded, but real life has kept me from doing a serious re-read. Working on it now.

WTF Bub? Are you still

"Working on it?"

I really do not care for people who coast or contribute nothing. I really appreciate people who are good enough to replace in to a game and help another group of mafia players out. Thanks for replacing in Bub...how about doing us a favor and replacing out if you can't contribute ANYTHING to the game you joined over 8 days ago. Five posts you have made. You've made almost as many posts (4) in other games/threads just in the last ten hours

And Cecily...I see you lurking as well.

[havingfitz]

Good morning NachOOOOOOOOOOOOO! So how do I play as scum again? Did you notice my sig? It's been so infrequent and long since I've been an anti-town (1 mafia replacement/1sk replacement) role I don't even know how I play as scum.

[havingfitz]

@nacho...please read my comments re: Cecily. I'd like your thoughts on her. Also...not sure a vote on Voided is going to go anywhere...you would be best served placing your vote on someone who wagon might actually have wheels (aside from mine tyvm) given the fact we only have 2+ days till deadline.

[havingfitz]

Well welcome Bub. I hope this flurry of activity lasts. I have not looked at neil that much since my focus on pappum was joined by Cecily and IK. With my current uncertainty towards the pappum role, that would bump up the possibility that neil was scum IMO. But it's not a strong enough feeling towards neil to want to see him go today over Cecily...and perhaps Pine or IK.

So I'm thinking my top five atm are: Cecily, IK & Pine, neil OR pappum.
****************

@Cecily...thanks for chiming in and saying nothing.

[havingfitz]

Wow? What is the problem neil? You are very defensive with anyone who casts an eye your way. My position on you hasn't changed...feel fee to ISO me. And do I need to repost my entire case on you everytime I mention your name as a suspect? If I am stepping back a bit from pappum I have to consider you again. And your threat at the end is silly. Feel free to vote me. Just realize there are consequences for being on mislynches...especially when you have no sound reasoning for being there.

[havingfitz]

As for Idiot King, what's so scummy about him? I've got a town read on him myself.

I found him scummy for pushing a crap case on me (FMPOV of course) and his continued defense on my top suspect at the time (pappum) despite what I considered to be a strong case against. In addition he has been extrememly lurky and on review of his ISO...he hasn't contributed anything IMO to the game. He's skating scum. I prefer people to not replace out but his slot is a black hole. And while I have taken a step back from pappum/Nacho...I still think there were solid points against him (as evidenced by his competitive wagon) so IK's persistent blind eye to pappum seemed off to me. Along with (FMPOV) his pushing a mislynch. So I'm not sure I would remove IK from my list even if there was a way of knowing for sure what Nacho's alignment is.

[havingfitz]

Void...who are your top three suspects and why? Is there anyone outside of those three who would you be ok with a lynch on today? Links to your cases on the top three would be fine if you have them.

[havingfitz]

I admit, I haven't focused on anyone else except Rat outside of replying to other things (or defending myslf as with Nacho and Chk), so I don't have any other case to give you. I was going to keep on Rat until his lynch, and then focus on looking at others because I'm sure that he's scum.

Isn't it in the best interest of town to at least give a few of your suspects and why? You must have some if you have been keeping up....especially in a game this looooooooooooong. What if, hypothetically, you weren't today's lynch but you were the NK? With only one suspect (PR/Nacho) to whom you have camped on...the remaining town would have less to go on in trying to figure out why you might have been the (once again) hypothetical NK.

[havingfitz]

Seems like more than a few people see a decent possibility of Cecily being scum. I'd still rather see her lynch than any of the others in the mix.

[havingfitz]

I don't quite understand the Cecily wagon; would someone be so kind as to reiterate it?

Not a summary but here are my posts on her. Not sure if anyone else has added anything to it...

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 6#p2898536
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p2900407
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 1#p2900671
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 6#p2921796
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 4#p2924024
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 4#p2926414

[havingfitz]

Voided's claim and the prospect of somehow proving it are not worth consideration IMO. Why?

Scum Void fakeclaiming could claim he neighborized a) a scumbuddy, or b) awwwwwwwww...the nk victim. If scumbuddy a is eventually killed and flips...VM could just say...I didn't know he was scum when I neighbored him.

Town Void telling the truth could pick a) scum as a neighbor or b) town as a neighbor, or c) awwwwwwwww...the nk victim. If scum a is eventually killed and flips...VM could just say...I didn't know he was scum when I neighbored him. b) even if town was neighbored and indicated such...even with a Void or neighbored town's flip [of town] we would still have no confidence that the other side of the duo was town.

Void's claim and any result of it IMO is null.

mod, TO and.......surprise!.......Idiotking could use a prod.

[havingfitz]

Wow...I really think it's time for a lynch but I'm surprised at how quick

Voided's wagon just got to L-1

<------

.

I would be interested in Void's flip more than several others in the game but not as much as my top suspects. It would be good to get Void's "cases" on others before he is lynched...perhaps some last words. If anyone is worried about a no lynch happening I will place the hammer if it comes down to it.

[havingfitz]

Also...I find it interesting most of the players I have stronger suspicions of are not on the Void wagon. I'm really curious in how this flip goes.

[havingfitz]

I would say my top three coming into D2 are Pine=Cecily & neil. Nacho has dropped a bit behind though his adament push on Void has him a close 4th. Pine's hammer when Void had promised his thoughts was unnecessary. And he [Pine] contributed little if anything D1. It's close between he and Cecily (who I stll think is obvscum) but Pine feels like a good start.

VOTE: Pine

[havingfitz]

That was a quick push to L-1. It would be good to hear from Nacho and Cecily before a quicklynch happens. Pine has my vote but I'll

Unvote

for now so we don't wind up with a <48 hr D2.

[havingfitz]

Pre-Edit: What is your case on me Fitz? That I pushed you? And everyone should take note, this is the first time Fitz has suspects OTHER then those who have questioned and pushed him! I'm proud of you Fitz! Though I still your only case on me that isn't stretching or misrepresenting, would have to be because your sour that I pushed you last day phase. Which I admit, I shouldn't have done now that I'm convinced there's really no way you could be scum and play the way you've played.

What are you talking about neil? Where have you pushed me recently?

And this is not the first time I have suspected you. That is a lie on your part.

I've stated for a large protion of the game that you've been a suspect of mine. Feel free to ISO if you don't require to be hand fed the posts. I've got you as one of my weaker scum reads and yet you continue to get so defensive about it. You done this with everyone that had cast a suspicious eye towards you. In fact...it seems to me that we’ve got more defensiveness on your behalf than scumhunting.

And what does whether or not someone pushed and questioned me have to do with me finding them suspicious? 1) Nothing, and 2) have you forgot your mini-wall post building a case on me. And you leave out the fact that not everyone who has suspected me has become a suspect of mine.

[havingfitz]

TO...why are you defending your vote? It was only one of 5. I just would like a little more conversation in the day than ~1 page worth.

neil

...you hardly mentioned TO at all yesterday. You mained a vote on Nacho until the end of D1 and then you start D2 guns blazing for TO. Based on gut? Do you have anything other than gut? What happened to your Nacho suspicions?

[havingfitz]

1)

I believe I've got a bit of explaining to do for yall after the game. I think you'll understand my playing style a lot better. Until then, I will admit something I'm not proud of. Day 1, I was so set on the Pappums lynch that I had really tunneled and not payed much attention to everyone else unless for some strange reason, I was brought up by them. I then went over the cases people presented against Voided and there were only two that stuck out to me. One I kind of dismissed, because I'm always cautious when it comes to the person hammering. That's Pine, obviously. The second was TO's case. It just didn't sit right with me, I think because the way I read it, it sounded more forced then anything else.

2)

Bud, take a look at your case again. You don't have one. Try real scum hunting, and don't focus on me.

Also Fitz,

3)

I didn't say it was the first time you targeted me.

I have a feeling you're looking at my posts and specifically trying to find places to start an argument with me. Even to the extent as stretching, like you did in a recent post. I don't understand why you're doing this, though I have some ideas, but I refuse to get into some logic debate with you right now. I believe you're town, and I know I am, so arguing with you won't do the town much good. If you still feel the need to lynch me, so that you can see you're wrong for yourself, feel free too. I believe once in awhile, everyone has to realize they're wrong at some point and if it takes my lynch to show you that, so be it. But the reason I'm defensive, is because you've now tunneled with your perception on me. You have no real suspicions, and I have looked over your ISO. Your cases aren't real. They are fabricated, stretched, perspectives that you've used my own words and changed them around or taken them out of context. I still have yet to see a single good point you've brought up that I have not acknowledged lately. This is why I'm led to believe, the only reason you don't like my play, is because it's been focused on you for a good part of the game. I'm not saying recently, I'm saying for a good part of the game. So please don't take this out of context again by saying I haven't targeted you recently, because I have said nothing about recently here.

1) So what is your take on Pine and is there anything other than gut behind your sudden TO suspicions? And you still haven't answered this:

You main[tain]ed a vote on Nacho until the end of D1 and then you start D2 guns blazing for TO. Based on gut? Do you have anything other than gut? What happened to your Nacho suspicions?

2) This seems to be your response to anyone who casts suspicion your way....you tell them they have no case and to go look somewhere else. Great defense.

3) See bold in your quote above and in the one below. You should keep track of what you say better. I'm not looking anywhere to start arguments with you...I've had you as a suspect the entire game...just not at the top of my list. How have I tunnelled you? You may not think any of my points on you are good. When does anyone ever agree with points made against them? Town knows there town and wouldn't support criticisms and scum don't want to get caught so they don't support criticisms. You saying I don't have good points is meaningless. It's what others think about them that matters. And show me one place where I have changed your words or taken them out of context. You are hyper sensitive and that IMO is suspicious. And I do not think you've focused on me for "a good part of the game"....but then again I'm not sure who you are focusing on....other than the person who's wagon you pushed most of day one which for some reason you have abandoned in favor of your current gut vote.

Pre-Edit: What is your case on me Fitz? That I pushed you? And

everyone should take note, this is the first time Fitz has suspects OTHER then those who have questioned and pushed him!

I'm proud of you Fitz! Though I still your only case on me that isn't stretching or misrepresenting, would have to be because your sour that I pushed you last day phase.

[havingfitz]

Present for Pine:

Unvote, Vote: Pine

Three full pages of posting elsewhere and you don't even bother to check here? Come on now, Pine.

I was reading up in all my games and was getting ready to do an activity check on Pine myself...Nacho beat me to it. I

hate

when people are active sitewide and choose to ignore a game. The fact it is a game where one is under immense pressure makes it even worse. I'd like to see what neil, Cecily, and Pine have to say about the Pine wagon. If someone hammers Pine before any of the aforerequested responses occur, please feel free to consider my vote on Pine as well...the only thing preventing me from hammering atm is for more comment from my top three suspects.

Also...I don't think anyone has mentioned claiming but if you do have one Pine, I would say now is a good time to make it.

[havingfitz]

Current gametime BST: Mon Apr 11, 2011 11:23 am
neil's last visited BST: Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:18 am

C'mon neil...nothing to say? Look forward to your response to post 671 and thoughts on Pine.

[havingfitz]

Not sure that was the best move to make TO since we don't know what abilities scum have. Now you could be RB'd and NK'd or possibly JK'd if the "NightVote" frontrunner is scum. If the "NightVote" frontrunner is not scum...then scum let you kill and they are either happy to let you live another day or take you out the following night as confirmed town. Haven't played too many games with Vig's but I would assume if you are in fact a vig...that scum have some PRs as well.

It might be better if we make our cases for our top non-Pine suspect and you decide to Vig on your own without telling us. If someone does come in and hammer Pine you should definitely use your shot tonight...if you are able to. I doubt you'll get another chance.

Also...I don't see Scum making a bold move like this when they have not suffered any losses and when TO isn't really getting that much attention.

If I'm to believe TO's claim and therefore tat she is town...that makes Void's lynch a bit more interesting to mull over. With seven on Void's mislynch I would be very surprised if there weren't at least two scum on his wagon. So IMO, if we remove Jahudo and TO from the mix...that two of Pine, chkflip, PT, Bub, and Nacho are scum. This sucks FMPOV because two of my top three suspects are not on the Void lynch...Cecily and neil. Of those two I am inclined to pass on neil and maintain my suspicions of Cecily. On the five let on the Void wagon...Pine is looking to be the concensus scum suspect which leaves one more. One of chkflip, PT, bub, and Nacho. I've had a town feel from Bub so for me...I would be looking at one of the chkflip, PT or Nacho group. I'm inclined to think chkflip is town because I seriously doubt andrew replaces out of a game where he is scum. So from my disjointed process of elimination that leaves me with PT and Nacho. Slight scum edge to Nacho but I would need to look them both over more closely.

tl:dr;

Not sure you should have claimed TO but my top suspects after Pine are Cecily annnnnnd based off POE and VCA a distant 2nd and 3rd of Nacho........................&...PT.

[havingfitz]

I couldn't even tell you what Setael's case on you was. My suspicions of you came from you and your actions....not anything that anyone else has put forward. And the first two paragraphs above + comic do nothing for your position. A waste of your time putting it tgether and our/my time reading it. And while I am interested in your Tracker claim (because if TO is telling the truth I could envision there being a Tracker) I'm not sure there is any way to confirm it unless there is a counter-claim. Who did you track last night and what was the result?

-Pre-edit. Why do you think someone is lying Cecily? Why couldn't everyone be telling the truth? I'm not about to assume there are two scum because that would be very dangerous IMO. I would be surprised if there were less than three so I'll stay with that assumption.

[havingfitz]

Result is directly above your post. It was intended to be part of Post 3.

Since this post you have posted 14 times in three other games. And have logged in as recently as 5.5 hours ago i.e. five hours after your last post in here and 8.5 hours after you stated you were an hour away from your part two.

Tick Tock.....

[havingfitz]

Pine has posted a shitload of times over the last 3-4 hours. He is toast. The only thing stopping me from hammering is fleshing out what to do with TO's claim. I've made my cases...like them or not...on Cecily and neil. I think Nacho still warrants consideration as well. I have not read over Setaels posts in detail so I'm not sure where I stand on her....though I did suspect IK. If someone has even less patience than I do and hammers Pine then you should pick your strongest suspect TO and not allow scum to try and deflect your suspicions to their benefit.

tl:dr;

Pine is scum and TO do what you have to do.

[havingfitz]

Cool...Pine has a little breathing room. I have not enjoyed exercising restraint and now that it is not the hammer....

VOTE: Pine

exhaaaaaaaaaaaaaale......that's better.

[havingfitz]

I need to look things over a bit and RL is in the way the next few days. Cecily is my frontrunner at the moment. Not sure who my 2nd is yet.

[havingfitz]

OK...so looking at the previous two day's votecounts...we only have 4 players remaining who were on the D1 mislynch.

Final Votecount of Day 1

Voidedmafia (7) - Nachomamma8, P.T. Barnum, chkflip, Bub Bidderskins,

tarsonisocelot, Jahudo

,

Pine

Cecily (1) -

havingfitz

havingfitz (2) - mikemike778, Idiotking
Nachomamma8 (3) -

Voidedmafia, neil1113

, Cecily

not voting (0):

I am assuming we have three mafia and that there were at least two on Void's lynch. Based on this assumption...that means FMPOV, at least one of these individuals -Nachomamma8, P.T. Barnum, chkflip, Bub Bidderskins- is scum.

Looking at the D2 scum lynch....

Final Votecount of Day 2

Pine (6) - P.T. Barnum, mikemike778,

tarsonisocelot

, Nachomamma8,

havingfitz

,

Pine

neil1113 (1) - Bub Bidderskins
Setael (1) - chkflip

not voting (3): Cecily,

neil1113

, Setael

Since Pine was so obviously the lynch target for the day...I would be extremely surprised if there was not at least one scumbuddy bussing him. Possibly two but I doubt it. I would guess there is at least one on his wagon and more than likely, one off it.

So again, FMPOV, that leaves PT, mikemike, and Nacho on the scum lynch. PT and Nacho both being on the D1 mislynch as well. So they are a subset of interest at the moment pending further review/ISOs/etc. Of the people off the Pine wagon, we have Bub, ck, Cecily and Setael. Of those I would be inclined to suspect one of my leading suspects for much of the game, Cecily. I need to look everyone over from off the wagon as well though.

I'll put my vote in play for the moment with VOTE: Cecily though it is definitely subject to change.

[havingfitz]

mike...your suspicions of me are annoying. You suspect me for being on the wagon of someone who had been identified as scum? I suppose getting off his wagon as soon as the "reaction fish/gamit/LIE" was revealed is scummy too?

If you think you have a good case on me...make it and vote me instead of tap dancing around me the entire game.

[havingfitz]

Reserved for Vote Count

---

@mike...annoying because you are. I think the name 'Fitz" has been typed more in this game by you than anyone else. You voted me early on D1 for:

-Looking to finish the day early and pushing for it
-Apparently writing off large parts of the day
-Flying onto a Rats wagon on the safe grounds of LAL

Which upon my response, that you consider fair enough, you stick with me because you get a

scum vibe

on me. A lot of your posts that express suspicions towards me have fuzzy words like seem, vibe, and instinct....but you also think I "scream scum" at you. Even with your D1 tunnel on me your suspicions still come across to me as tap dancing. Voting me for no good reason and maintaining suspicions based on the day 1 gambit/lie. That annoys me. Your passive, continued suspicions towards me annoy me. I would feel much better if you would just put your vote back on me and take a stand. Plus it would be good to see who else felt inclined to join you.

[havingfitz]

Try not to let it affect your PR hunting too much ...

What are you talking about?

[havingfitz]

But we should lynch Bub today.

I'm not opposed to this if the Cecily wagon doesn't get anywhere. I just ISO'd Bub and did not see anything that screamed town to me. Plus he managed to make it on the Void wagon and avoid the Pine wagon (while continually expressing his suspicions towards Pine). I need to check on his two votes today and see what their build up is all about but I'm fine for now with an...

FOS Bub

[havingfitz]

BTW mod...Cecily and Setael both need a big prod in the arse!

[havingfitz]

BTW mod...Cecily and Setael both need a big prod in the arse!

D'oh...looks like mod will not be prodding people until Monday.

Focking get in here and post Setael and Cecily!!!

I see you posting in other games. Focking lurkers.

Can we please get some more support for the Cecily wagon people?

[havingfitz]

Still catching up.

Fitz, what are you going to do if they're replaced?

Change my vote from Cecily to whoever replaces her and keep an eye on Setael.

[havingfitz]

I see Cecily was logged in at 1127 est. Nothing to say Cecily?

[havingfitz]

v/LA till Tuesday night.

noted.

[havingfitz]

v/LA till Tuesday night.

noted.

Back. I'll try to get something posted today. Can anyone not voting Cecily (aside from Cecily and her scum buddy) please look over her ISO and ask yourself why you aren't voting her?

[havingfitz]

got home later than expected: promised post tomorrow

Five days and counting since last post.

Was the post Easter mass prod an official one or does PT still need a real one?

I'll prod him again.

I checked in, had nothing to add to the cases I've made because no one else had really posted anything worth noting. I've got a lot of work today, I'll try and get something in tomorrow.

I see you had time to log in this morning but still nothing to add to our game?

[havingfitz]

PT (whom you replaced) was the first one to vote on Pine,

Actually he (PT) was 3rd to vote Pine.

[havingfitz]

havingfitz's push on cecily for post times is seriously fucking stupid too.

If you don't agree with people putting pressure on players who are skating through this game then fine...we disagree, but there's no need to be a twat while you're at it.

[havingfitz]

wat are you talking about. it was nothing to do with him skating through the game, trying to aspire scum motive to ask when people posts is stupid. i'm not insulting you as a person just saying your attack is stupid. I'll SUBSTITUTE the word stupid for silly from now on. hehehe that's so silly! better?

I don't recall asking Cecily when she posts? Not sure what your point is. I am giving her shit for not posting because she's under a bit of suspicion at the moment and she isn't doing anything to defdend herself. If she does turn out to be town I'll be pissed and if she is scyum...as I have suspected/hoped since Day 2...then great! I'm voting her for carry over from my earlier suspicions and her avoidance of the game and any worthwhile content. Which I do see as scummy. Pardon my reaction. Your assessment of my pressure on Cecily was twat-like....not you as a person

Preview edit...who said that Faraday?

[havingfitz]

You didn't respond to this Faraday:

wat are you talking about. it was nothing to do with him skating through the game, trying to aspire scum motive to ask when people posts is stupid. i'm not insulting you as a person just saying your attack is stupid. I'll SUBSTITUTE the word stupid for silly from now on. hehehe that's so silly! better?

I don't recall asking Cecily when she posts? Not sure what your point is. I am giving her shit for not posting because she's under a bit of suspicion at the moment and she isn't doing anything to defdend herself. If she does turn out to be town I'll be pissed and if she is scyum...as I have suspected/hoped since Day 2...then great! I'm voting her for carry over from my earlier suspicions and her avoidance of the game and any worthwhile content. Which I do see as scummy.

Also,

We should be lynching Chkflip today. I like fitz as the 3rd buddy for Pine based on some of the stuff pine said too. Bud/Nacho/Setael are pretty much confirmed as town beyond doubt.

Could you be a little more specific....perhaps provide the rationale for you opinions above? Why is Cecily OK and does OK=town? Is mike more suspect than Cecily IYO? And considering you were the mod for the only game I have ever been scum in (as a replacement at that) you have to realize I'm not scum in this one.

Mod...I'll be v/LA from Monday till Wednesday, 2-4 May.

noted.

[havingfitz]

Fitz will you have enough access to switch your vote if neccessary?

I'm offline in a few minutes and will not be on again until late Tuesday night at the very earliest. But I'm not interested in switching my vote from Cecily unless it's close to deadline and I don't think the potential lynchee is town.

Fitz's response to a tiny bit of pressure sucks.

By tiny bit of pressure do you mean my being called Faraday's 2nd suspect? What about my response sucked? I don't think my response was any different than it has been to anyone else who has insinuated I'm scum.

That's me til Wednesday.

[havingfitz]

1) I happy to see the chk wagon growing. 3) So far based solely off of who's being pushed chk/fitz seems like a good pairing.

While I don't like judging completely off of who's sticking up for whom I do not see chk as being anything other than aligned with Pine because setael's case was honestly that strong and not going with it was a rookie scum mistake.

3) And now fitz is pushing me, and I'm still not completely certain what his case is against me

and I'm sad he won't be back until deadline to fill me in. It just seems like a perfect grouping of three and since that's the number of anti-town people we've agreed on for this game I'm fairly certain those are the remaining two. And at the very least it's chk and someone who's playing the last role very [and I mean very] cleverly.

Bold is mine.

1) Cecily...you keep pointing to newb or rookie mistakes by chkflp in your suspicions towards him. He has been on the site longer than you (albeit only by 2 weeks), has made 5x as many posts as you, and he has been involved in 51 topics/games while you have been in 8. Throwing out newb/rookie tells under these circumstances seems a bit weak...and I haven't noticed but has anyone else agreed with you on your newb/rookie accusations towards chkflp?

2) Could you explain this? What do you mean when you say chk and I make a good pairing "based solely off of who's being pushed?" Can you elaborate?

3) I've been pushing you for a few days. What do you mean "

And now

" I'm pushing you? And I have provided numerous suspicions towards you. My ISO 34, ISO 37, ISO 45, ISO 46, ISO 56 and ISO 57 to name several. What do you want to try and tap dance around?

---

Nacho...you are all over the place. Your reason for suspecting me is stupid. It was meant to be humorous. I realize past roles has nothing to do with respect to this game...but interjecting it as humor gave me another chance to bitch about the disparity. I have

never

been scum in almost two years on this site, in 30+ games, except! for one game that I replaced in which was modded by Faraday...hence my comment to him.

---

Faraday...you don't know what you are doing. Are you trying to relive our game where you were Riddick (ie suspecting me without any basis)? You haven't provided any reasoning for suspecting me. Saying you "aren't big on explaining [your] reasoning" is a cop out. Everyone still alive in the game has provided ample material to at least be able to source/explain whatever suspicions you do happen to have. What is your case on chkflp and on me?

---

Looking at the Day one lynch....four (Nachomamma8, P.T. Barnum aka Faraday, chkflip, Bub Bidderskins) of the seven players remain from the Void mislynch. One of the dead has been ID's as scum...I find it hard to believe on a 7 player mislynch that there is not at least one other scum member (and I am assuming there are three scum). As I do not think chkflp is scum...that leaves me with Nacho, Faraday and Bub. I'm not confident enough to put a vote on any of them ATT though.

Of the four remaing players alive off the Void mislynch I think there could be one scum (havingfitz, mikemike778, Idiotking aka Setael, Cecily). Discounting myself of course...that leaves me with three. I do not think Setael is scum based on his case on Pine (though it would have been a perfect time to bus a partner given Pine's poor play and scummy hammer) and between mikemike and Cecily...I suspect Cecily significantly more than I do mikemike (see earlier ISO sampling in this post). I would also note that I had Pine 2nd on my suspect list D1 before he hammered Void and voted him in my first post on D2. I also voiced D1 suspicions on Pine in my ISO 56 and ISO 57.

As for the D2 Pine wagon....I could see there being at least one partner bussing him which (not counting myself) leaves Faraday, mikemike, and Nacho. As I am leaning against mikemike being scum ATM that gives me, once again, the toss up between Nacho and Faraday. They are too close for me to choose between but if I had to I'd probably lean towards Faraday. I definitely think there is at least one scum not bussing their partner Pine...which leaves us with Bub, Setael and, once again, Cecily. I leaning town on Setael and between Bub and Cecily it's once again significant suspicions towards Cecily guiding my vote her way.

tl:dr;

I'm not convinced chkflp is scum so I will not change my vote from Cecily.

[havingfitz]

1) Not providing cases is kinda what I do, sorry to say.

2) Also don't ignore my pointing out the pine/you connections, that is scummy, sure I didn't post 6000 words and give it fucking subheadings (not a shot at you btw) but that doesn't make it less valid.

3) Chkflip is relatively scummy, I felt andrew jumping on the prat wagon day 1 was scummy for the reasons he did it. And very atypical since Andrew is someone who I would expect to see gambits as not a scum tell, since i've seen him pull retarded ones as town before that got him lynched.

1) Well isn't that convenient? That's seems a bit like

Why should we agree with Faraday's conclusion/suspicions?

Uhhhh...not because he made any good points....but because he

thinks

someone is scummy. WTF? Stop being a lazy ass and show your case.

2) Which interactions between Pine and me were scummy? The fact I was pushing Pine relatively hard D1 and followed up D2 with an immediate vote on him or the fact Pine mentioned a few times he was suspicious towards me but never provided a case he promised? Which IMO would be consistent with scum not following through on...and was pointed out to him by me...because it's not easy for scum to build cases on people who aren't guilty. Kind of like calling someone scummy and not being able to provide any rationale other than "Because."

3) So Chkflp is "relatively scummy?" WTF happened to "Vote chkflip, he's obvscum. Srsly." and "chkflip is the scummiest guy I've ever met"? Your conviction to your non-existent cases on your suspects is appropriate for the amount of effort you have provided on your non-existant cases.

And perhaps you voted me (mislynched) me in the last game because you do not know how to read me/town?

I would point out to anyone not named Faraday/Riddick/Eddard Stark that he is replacing someone who was starting to garner a decent amount of suspicions (PT), he is defending someone who has garnered a decent amount of suspicions (Cecily) and he is pushing a non-existant case on someone who has not been a suspect (save from mikemike and perhaps Cecily) for the majority of the game.

Could Cecily and Faraday be a team?

Four + hours until deadline. What would a chkflp town flip tell those of you on his wagon ATM?

[havingfitz]

I can confirm I do not have a gun. Not sure there is no possibility of there being no town roles remaining with a gun though I would assume not. So I'm inclined to believe Faraday's claim/investigation atm. I did not necessarily have a scum read on PT for most of the game (if at anytime iirc) so other than Faraday's crap misguided pushes on me yesterday I'd prefer to think him town...as hard as it may be.

@Faraday, other than your no rationale gut reasoning...why is the scum team Cecily and mikemike? I've provided lots of reasons I suspect Cecily to be scum and am more than happy to plant my vote on her. Without going into a full fledged VCA though...I do have a hard time believing there was only one scum (Pine) on a seven player D1 mislynch.....and there are only two players left alive off that mislynch (Faraday and Bub). I'm cool with a Cecily lynch but would need to think about her potential partner. Assuming of course she is scum.

Also...if there are two scum left, as I assume there are, we are in MYLO. What are people's thoughts on no-lynching?

[havingfitz]

Cecily...it looks like the only reason you think Faraday is scum is because you don't believe his claim. But you don't think his claim is unreasonable. WTF? Also...you really haven't focused on the PT/Faraday slot....you have expressed some suspicion at times but nothing committed. Very flipfloppish IMO on that player slot.

You did however think I was scum with chkflp. Has that opinion changed? It just seems odd to me that you have susapected me for much of this game and yet you now want to clear me for a rationale I do not follow. Can you elaborate on why you think I am clear? It appears to be based on NK speculation and not because of the alledged gunsmith result from Faraday (which you obviously don't believe based on your vote).

[havingfitz]

Vanilla Town.

mikemike can go next since he seems to be around atm

[havingfitz]

mikemike...can you explain what your role does? How it works?

[havingfitz]

Does the fact there is already a confirmed 1-shot neighborizor matter to anyone? I'm not familiar with the role but it seems odd to have two in one game.

[havingfitz]

Is this a claim Bub can confirm? Does a neighborizor engage someone else in conversation? mikemike? Bub?

Which btw...I see Bub was logged in this morning. I assume he still has 48 hours left coming out of the start of the day before he gets a prod but it would be good to hear from him.

[havingfitz]

mikemike...can you explain what your role does? How it works?

[havingfitz]

That's what I assumed Faraday but I thought I would give the claimant the opportunity to explain. If that is the case...my next question would be if Bub responded....and can therefore confirm mikemike's claim. Not sure I'm going to be able to be convinced that there were two town aligned 1-shot neighborizors. And who is to say the role is town aligned....

p-edit...got distracted by phone call and several posts were made. if anything I say above has been touched on...disregard.

[havingfitz]

rhinox if a 1-shot gunsmith investigated a player who died would they be able to re-use their abillity the next night

[havingfitz]

I still find it hard to believe there wasn't at a minimum a 2nd scum on the D1 mislynch. Which would mean either Faraday or Bub is scum.

[havingfitz]

I think Faraday is giving Bub a town pass for comments made by Jerbs....iirc. I don't think I'd feel safe excluding anyone from consideration though like you [Setael]...I would be inclined to believe faraday as 1) I know his coments regarding me are accurate and when he made them...there could have been a chance that I was a pro-town PR with a gun (a 1-shot vig?) though unlikely, and 2) a 1-shot gunsmith does at least give the town a little bit of info and if it didn't exist...then town would have a pretty crappy hand dealt to them.

Based on the fact I believe there is a 2nd scum on the Void mislynch...and if I am to believe Faraday's claim...that would leave Bub for serious consideration. But I need to look at him closer.

If he's not scum then scum are poised for a quicklynch and a win. Something worth considering Setael.

Anyone interested in a no lynch?

[havingfitz]

I would prefer to not assume we only are dealing with a 2 player scum team. And where is the traitor idea coming from? Did I miss something or are we (ou Faraday) just hypothesizing?

[havingfitz]

Faraday...can you unvote for a second and give your actions a bit of thought? I know you like to go off gut but if you are town as you claim....I think it is in your and the rest of town's best interest to think a bit more before acting.

I'm not discounting the fact that mikemike could very well be scum but I've also had strong suspicions towards Cecily this entire game...and I can not discount my opinion that there is in all likelihood more than one scum [Pine] on Void's 7 person mislynch. Which would point to you or Bub if there is more than one.

Additionally...I have never played with a traitor in 30+ games so where the sudden push/acceptance that there could be one in here is coming from does not make sense. If anything...unless I am mistaken...considering the possibility there is a traitor in the game would seem to benefit scum. I would not even begin to think we are in anything but MYLO at this time and luckily I was wrong earlier when I thought 3 votes would be a lynch.

I think Bub deserves a closer look and I still maintain my suspicions towards Cecily. I'm not ready att to put a vote on mikemike....I still think a better play would be Cecily or Bub. Or a no lynch. Though if there is a no lynch all that would do is allow scum to get rid of (I assume) Setael (who it appears most are considering town) or myself (in light of your claim). If we did go that route we could all give our top two suspects and then whoever is nk'd would be able to give their opinions pre-nk/flip/confirmed alignment.

As it is at this moment I'd say my suspects are Cecily, Bub (based on VCA and claims), mikemike...the you and last Setael.

[havingfitz]

Could you point it out to me again...(as I go looking for it)...

[havingfitz]

I've done some thinking, and right now I'm pretty confidant that MikeMike is scum.

Back on D-2 when Pine fake-claimed tracker, he said that he tracked MikeMike and got nothing. However, if he was an actual tracker and tracked MikeMike on N-1 he

would

have found that MikeMike targetted Jahudo, assuming that MikeMike's telling the truth. However, he said that he got

nothing

.

aSSUMING THIS IS THE LIE TO WHICH YOU REFER fARADAY...HOW IS IT A LIE? [CRAP...PARDON THE CAPS]... Pine fakeclaimed tracker so the fact he didn't see mikemike going anywhere means nothing.

p-edit + self obtained realization.....

OK..I see what the point is regarding mikemike's reaction to Pine's claim. I need to go look at his post-Pine actions.

What does mike have to say about it? It might be enough to vote him [mikemike].....

[havingfitz]

Where has mikemike lied? The current excitement re: him appears to be based on his non-reaction to Pine's claim. I agree it is suspicious but at the same time...he already had his vote on Pine and a Pine lynch looked like a sure thing. Why out yourself [ie mikemike]? Though I think neighbors/neighborizors are a pretty much worthless role. So on the one hand...Pine appeared doomed whether mikemike said anything or not, on the other hand, even if mikemike had called him on it...not sure there would have been any repercussions towards mike. Seems like a coin toss as to his response's implications.

[havingfitz]

Following the Pine lynch and your neighborizing of Bub...did your lack of reaction towards Pine's fakeclaim findings on you come up in the QT?

[havingfitz]

ooh. good question.

Do you ever sleep?

[havingfitz]

In addition to a sudden urge to vomit....I'll VOTE: Bub.

I still suspect Cecily more but based on, and consistent with, my VCA sentiments...I like what I view as a 50/50 chance.

Cecily and Bub...what are your takes/reads on each other?

[havingfitz]

Er, fitz why the hell are you voting bub over mikemike here? I'm itching to lay down a vote but :impulsecontrol:

Because I think there was more than one scum on Void's mislynch. My choices are you and Bub. Would you prefer I vote you?

[havingfitz]

Eh, why is Bub scummier than Mikemike iyo? Or even cecily I guess, who's sort of dropped off everyone's suspicions (and still voting me, no?)

I'm not saying mikemike is less scummy than Bub and I actually think Cecily is scummier than both of them. My point is...if IMO I am to believe there was more than one scum on the D1 mislynch....and there are only two people still alive off that mislynch...then why would I look in a bigger pool of candidates? Especially when I am inclined to think one of the two players still alive is more likely to be town (you). I never really suspected PT and other than your push on me the other day I have not got a scum feel from you. That narrows it down to one person for me (Bub).

[havingfitz]

But...vote count analysis is susceptible to being very fucking wrong. With only 2 group scum (we know this for definite, pretty much) why can't there only be 1 scum on the day 1 mislynch? if anything I think the scum are more likely to be

off

the wagon to distance from each other. Traitor I've no idea about.

I mean I just think you should be voting your top scumread.

What makes it pretty much definite that there are only two scum? We had you investigative role...we had a 1 shot vig. That's not very fair if there are two scum. And I have never played in a game with a traitor so I would not presume to know how to interpret a game to determine there was one. If there are only two scum (ie 1 left)...great! We aren't in MYLO. I think there are three (ie 2 remaining) and I think at least one other was on the D1 lynch.

Why do you think Bub is not scum? Based on one comment Jerbs made when he replaced out? That seems awfully weak.

If you are convinced Setael is town...and your investigation indicates I am town (for those who believe you at least and are not considering the traitor thing)...then that's two people you believe town who suspect Bub. And who along with you is avoiding the Bub wagon?

[havingfitz]

If I check recently finished mini normals I wonder what the percentages are of D1 mislynches with only one scum?

I guess I do trust my VCA in this circumstance over my actual read because I suspect Cecily more than I do Bub.

[havingfitz]

UNVOTE: for a moment.

[havingfitz]

OK...I just did a quick check on the last ten games mini normals (in Completed Games) and came up with 40 percent of games having only 1 scum on the mislynch. That's more than I expected. Back to my favorite suspect.

VOTE: Cecily

[havingfitz]

As far as him not getting a tracker result when you targetted him, I doubt that's true.

Bub...what are you talking about here? What result are you talking about from when who targetted who? You aren't referring to Pine's fake tracker claim and the result he said he got on mikemike are you?

And how does mikemike's actions around the time Void claimed make him scummy? You say he should have immediately counter claimed. How many times have any of us ever seen a 1-shot Neighborizor in a game? If I had got that role PM I would have been like...whuh? And to have that role and see another player claim the exact same role had to make a player really wonder what was going on. I would have taken the claim as truthful (whether I was a scum or town neighborizor). How would mikemike KNOW that Void was town? Based on Void's claim or based on the fact you think he [mikemike] is scum? When you were neighborized by mikemike did any of the QT conversation revolve around the fact that there we two 1-shot neighborizors in the game?

...you knew that Voided was town. You knew that if you counter-claimed, and voided was lynched, then the suspision would fall onto you. A townie would instantly jump onto somebody who claimed their exact same role, but you backed off and distanced yourself from that very wagon.

I'm not sure mikemike ever backed off Void...I don't recall him ever being ON Void to begin with. What would mikemike coming out and claiming 1-shot neighborizor in response to Void's claim have accomplished? It would have either sealed Void's fate (which wasn't necessary) or just confused people's views towards mikemike (whether he was town or scum). If I was scum and had a 1-shot neighborizor role I'm not sure if I would have ever even botherd to use it after Void's claim. I think I would have avoided using it and if the need to claim came up later in the game...either claim VT or some other PR fakeclaim that did not mirror Voids's.

tl:dr; I'm not sure mikemike's actions are as unreasonable as you have portrayed them to be Bub.

Who are your #2 and #3 suspects Bub?

[havingfitz]

havingfitz admits i'm awesome too.

There have been two players today that have had an opportunity to hammer. Faraday had a chance to hammer Bub and now mikemike had the chance to hammer Cecily. Based on the assumption I am working with that there are two scum still alive...I do not think it would be unreasonable to have one scum bus the other. That said...if Bub was town, and I am town (based on I know I am and based on Faraday's investigation result)...that would mean two of Faraday, mikemike, Cecily and Setael are scum. Setael is being viewed as town because of her push on Pine...Faraday is being viewed as town for his unopposed claim and how it fits in the game plus his accurate investigation result. This would leave Cecily and mikemike as scum. But mikemike was on the Bub wagon when it was at L-1 and I noticed Cecily online ATT as well....which was why I unvoted suddenly. If Bub was town and Cecily is scum as many suspect...I think she had a short window to hammer Bub for the win (assuming 2 scum left).

I'm rambling a bit...it's late and I need to sleep.

So mikemike has a chance to hammer Cecily but is waiting for some reason. What was the reason again?

Also...why do people keep bringing up a traitor? I've never even played in a game that had one before so I find it amusing it keep being brought up. If there is a traitor...does that person even know s/he is a traitor? Is a traitor town until recruited/shanghai'd by scum? If so...wouldn't the traitor have been selected before this point in the game? I'm not sure what good it does to bring up the possibility of there being a traitor of only one scum left. I hope there is one scum left and that it is Cecily. And if there is a traitor (which I hate even hypothesizing about because I don't think there is), if they arean't scum yet then everyone who has a town aura about them is still open to suspicion. Which only helps scum as it braodens the pool of reasonable/likely suspects. And for those who think it may be me....if I don't know I'm one...and Faraday used his inv on me last night....then I still haven't been recruited into the scum group. So I'm not sure why that option is being tossed around. Still rambling. Zzzzzzz

P-edit...looks like Faraday did some pre-hammer thinking too.

[havingfitz]

EBWOP:

"I'm not sure what good it does to bring up the possibility of there being a traitor

of

only one scum left." should have read,
"I'm not sure what good it does to bring up the possibility of there being a traitor

or

only one scum left."

[havingfitz]

So the traitor wants to see scum make it to the end and wouldn't have a kill ability (and therefore no result in an investigation). That seems like a nice prospect for scum to throw out there to keep town suspicious of each other. If there is a traitor <as I smack myself for perpetuating what I think is not the case>, would odds favor there being only 1 scum left? And would the traitor count in the numbers as scum? What I mean is...if Cecily was town....and there was 1 scum and a traitor <smack>...scum NKs town and there are four still alive tomorrow. 2 town, 1 scum, and the traitor. Is that game over? Also...there is no insurance that scum wouldn't have unknowingly helped lynch or NK a potential traitor. I still don't see it being the case. My money is still on two fulltime scum left. If Cecily is scum...we on to MYLO tomorrow and if she's not...game over.

Good night.

Pre-edit. Or two 1-shot neighborizors. I've at least played in games with Neighbors (as you should know). None with a traitor iirc.

Now goodnight.

[havingfitz]

Thx Setael....I actually think it would be a fun role to have. For our sake I hope the game configuration is either 3 scum or 2 scum + traitor. If we're 3 scum (ie 2 remaining) + a traitor...I think town would be screwed.

Who is not voting Cecily and why are they not commenting on it. Why is Cecily not posting...claiming some sort of defense? She is v/LA until Sunday but she had the time to log on to the site ~11 hours ago when she was starting to garner some renewed attention and votes.

[havingfitz]

I would think so. I only mention it because Setael had an example. Though the example's town PRs were stronger. I'm still banking on three ordinary scum. Though if we are to believe the two weak ass 1-shot neighborizor claims...I could see the 2-1 set up being an option. If that is the case and Cecily is scum...game over/town win. That would work.

Bub...what's up? What are your thoughts on Cecily?

[havingfitz]

Why does three scum rely on mikemike being town? I mean...Cecily is my top target. If I had to pick a 2nd it would be a toss up between Bub and mikemike. The only reason Bub is ahead in my mind at this time is because of the D1 wagon. But I've backed off of that a bit based on the high number of games with only 1 scum on a D1 mislynch wagon.

How do you see mikemike and Bub and is there anything that really makes you think they are town or scum?

[havingfitz]

When I saw her online I immediately unvoted. At the time I thought Bub was at L-1 but as I look back I see Setael had unvoted Bub 15 minutes prior to my unvote...which I had not noticed when I unvoted. I do not know if Cecily had been online prior to Setael unvoting Bub when he actually was at L-1 so that is a null now. I do know however that she has been on since her last post and not commented on the recent attention towards her.

[havingfitz]

If you were town, then that would not have been your thought process. Catching scum would be well worth giving up such trivial information as the fact that you are a neighborizer. The counter-claim would have made it evident that Voided was lying and he would have been lynched for sure. However, you knew that Voided would flip town and so you didn't want to counter-claim because then you would come under fire for it the next day.

The scumteam is Cec/MikeMike, but Mike is confirmed scum at this point.

Why would mikemike assume he was catching Void in a lie? If mikemike was/is town...he wouldn't be sure of Void's alignment and he would probably feel the claim (not the alignment) was legitimate. If he had counter claimed as you mention Void probably would have been more assured of being lynched than he already was. I'm not saying mikemike is town but your continued push on him seems very contrived and based on a lot of imagination.

Also,

As far as him not getting a tracker result when you targetted him, I doubt that's true.

Bub...what are you talking about here? What result are you talking about from when who targetted who? You aren't referring to Pine's fake tracker claim and the result he said he got on mikemike are you?

And how does mikemike's actions around the time Void claimed make him scummy? You say he should have immediately counter claimed. How many times have any of us ever seen a 1-shot Neighborizor in a game? If I had got that role PM I would have been like...whuh? And to have that role and see another player claim the exact same role had to make a player really wonder what was going on. I would have taken the claim as truthful (whether I was a scum or town neighborizor). How would mikemike KNOW that Void was town? Based on Void's claim or based on the fact you think he [mikemike] is scum? When you were neighborized by mikemike did any of the QT conversation revolve around the fact that there we two 1-shot neighborizors in the game?

...you knew that Voided was town. You knew that if you counter-claimed, and voided was lynched, then the suspision would fall onto you. A townie would instantly jump onto somebody who claimed their exact same role, but you backed off and distanced yourself from that very wagon.

I'm not sure mikemike ever backed off Void...I don't recall him ever being ON Void to begin with. What would mikemike coming out and claiming 1-shot neighborizor in response to Void's claim have accomplished? It would have either sealed Void's fate (which wasn't necessary) or just confused people's views towards mikemike (whether he was town or scum). If I was scum and had a 1-shot neighborizor role I'm not sure if I would have ever even botherd to use it after Void's claim. I think I would have avoided using it and if the need to claim came up later in the game...either claim VT or some other PR fakeclaim that did not mirror Voids's.

tl:dr; I'm not sure mikemike's actions are as unreasonable as you have portrayed them to be Bub.

Who are your #2 and #3 suspects Bub?

[havingfitz]

Me - Post #1134 » Thu May 12, 2011 8:13 pm
Bub - Last visited: Thu May 12, 2011 10:20 pm

Bub...why no response to the above?

[havingfitz]

Counter claiming would make it evident that Voided was lying. It is quite rare for there to be two neighborizers in the same game. Your hesitance to do so reads as scummy to me.

If mikemike was town....how would he know Void was lying? And this:

And how does mikemike's actions around the time Void claimed make him scummy? You say he should have immediately counter claimed. How many times have any of us ever seen a 1-shot Neighborizor in a game? If I had got that role PM I would have been like...whuh? And to have that role and see another player claim the exact same role had to make a player really wonder what was going on. I would have taken the claim as truthful (whether I was a scum or town neighborizor). How would mikemike KNOW that Void was town? Based on Void's claim or based on the fact you think he [mikemike] is scum?

Your defense of MikeMike is noted, but I don't see why a townsperson would not counter-claim at that point, and none of the discussion in the QT revolved around that fact at all. Furthermore, you are suggesting that you not use the Neighborizer claim then to catch what a pro-town person would view as scum in order to perserve a fakeclaim for later in the game. That is simply anti-town and exactly what scum would think. And the question isn't about what would have occured if he had counter-claimed, the question is: why didn't he? To this point, the only reasonable answer that I can come up with is: because he's scum.

FYI: My number two and three suspects are you and Cecily. You may still be a traitor despite the gunsmith investigation, and your shameless defense of MikeMike is noted.

Why is it taking you until now to suspect mikemike? Why did you not express suspicions in the QT or voice/share suspicions when D3 started? Instead...you spend the day targetting chkflp (town) and PT/Faraday (who I don't see anyone doubting as town) AND you agree with Nacho that mikemike is town. If mikemike's actions surrounding his silence when Void claimed are so suspicious to you now...why weren't they brought up in the QT or when D3 began?

You also state that Cecily and chkflp (town) are not the same alignment.

Plus I still have not seen a response to this:

As far as him not getting a tracker result when you targetted him, I doubt that's true.

Bub...what are you talking about here? What result are you talking about from when who targetted who? You aren't referring to Pine's fake tracker claim and the result he said he got on mikemike are you?

And finally...despite stating your assumption that there are three scum in this game, you are now content to modify Faraday's result on me by calling me a traitor and bumping Cecily (who has been high on your list for much of yesterday and who you should find scum based on chkflp flipping town) down below me.

"Noting" my defense of mikemike is amusing. I'm not defending mikemike..I'm pointing out areas of your case on him that I do not find valid. If you could have made a good point on him I would not have had an issue with it.

tl:dr;

Bub really comes across as scum the more I look at his recent posts and his push on mikemike today for suspicions that would have been just as valid yesterday if they had been voiced makes me believe he is scum just pushing for another mislynch. If more people suspect Bub than Cecily I would switch. I view them as equally scummy at this point.

EXACTLY!

Damb you have a lot of alts.

[havingfitz]

Bub...are you or are you not suspicious of mikemike for the sole reason of his claim and how he acted D1 following Void's 1-shot neighborizor claim?

Assuming that to be the "obv scum behaviour earier in the game"...how could it be that you only realized it here on D4? To the extent that you say

"When I saw that, I was instant convinced that MikeMike was scum,"

. How could it only dawn on you now when you were aware of Void's claim, you know he was lynched D1, and on N2 you happen to get (I assume) a PM from the mod stating you have been neigbored by mikemike and you then proceed to have discussions with him in a QT.

sO YOU'RE IN A qt WITH MIKEMIKE AND YOU AREN'T EVEN THINKING (PARDON THE caps) that it odd there is another 1-shot in the game. You don't mention it in the QT and you don't bring it up at all on D3. Instead you focus on trying to lynch (as we now know and/or assume) town. You suspected Cecily before your sudden realization there was another neighborizor. Why not now?

I think this is all a valid line of questioning and hypoithesizing as you are doing in your case against mikemike.

[havingfitz]

Faraday (or whoever you are)....are you scum? What do you think of Bub remaining quiet on mikemike yesterday but basing (as far as I can tell) his entire mikemike case today on something he was blatantly aware of as of N2?

[havingfitz]

Cecily gone until today I think. I see confirmation bias as well but that doesn't mean one of them isn't scum.

Looked over Cecily's ISO to see who should would most likley suspect between Bub and mikemike (since I assume she doesn't plan to self vote and I don't think a Faraday wagon is going to go anywhere) and neither of them really jumped out as people she suspects. I could look closer but I was too overwhelmed by her lack of any content throughout the game. If she is not scum I'm going to be very pissed. Has anyone played in any other games with her? On the subject of her not being scum....she almost has to be being at L-1. I know I am town and I believe Faraday's claim (coupled with the fact he passed up an opportunity to hammer Bub or mikemike earlier today). I also think Setael is town (where are you Setael...feel free to add your two cents occasionally)...so that leaves Bub and mikemike as town hesitating to hammer. Whichever one of you is town...hammer FCS.

Do either of you not think Cecily is scum?

[havingfitz]

Zzzzzzzzzzzz

[havingfitz]

Setael...who is scum...Bub or mikemike?

[havingfitz]

spoiler: mikemike and cecily

Setael's not another of your alts is she? And is your reasoning on mikemike still POE based on your town read on Bub (which iirc was Jerb's exit statement)?

[havingfitz]

So one statement out of all the posts made by the Bub and mikemike player slots is going to determine your read on a player? That seems a bit....weak. It's still not a slam dunk for me either way with regard to Bub and mikemike (I'm going to be really pissed if neither of them is scum) but ATM I'm leaning Bub for all the reason I've brought up recently. The

dodgey

bits.

[havingfitz]

Like I said before, my reads have been drastically changed today by the combination of the claims given and me discovering MikeMike's slip.

And by mikemike's "slip" you mean the fact he didn't counter-claim Void...right?

I find the delayed discovery of your "instant" scum-tell of him more suspicious than his lack of a counter-claim.

[havingfitz]

I don't understand why neither Bub OR mikemike are willing to hammer Cecily. If Cecily was scum, whomever of Bub and mikemike are town (because if both of them are town they would have voted her for the instant win) should have voted her by now. Fock! Hammer the contentless slacker.

So out of sheer boredom here are some musings...

We know Bub AND mikemike are not scum because they would have been able to vote Cecily for the win already.

We know Cecily is not town because 1) we know from above that Bub AND mikemike aren't scum and 2) if either Bub or mikemike were scum...they would have been able to vote Cecily for the win already.

Cecily is confirmed scum.

Bub or mikemike could conceivable both be town but we know they aren't both scum. So just focking hammer Cecilyscum.

Or are we waiting patiently for her v/LA to end and her either say something worthless or for her to self vote like Pine did?

I feel so good about being right re: Cecily for the majority of the game.

mikemike...if you have addressed the fact that you did not attack Pine when he claimed you had not visited anyone (the night you visited Bub) could you please post a link to where.

Bub...could you please explain your reaction to Pine's fakeclaim? Since you were visited by mikemike...you both would have known Pine was lying when he claimed to have gotten no result on mikemike. Yet for some reason you do not feel the need to put a vote down on him.....who you knew was lying.

Another also....has anyone mentioned that Pine addresses his "scum partners" in his closing post? It doesn't do scum any good to indicate there are still multiple scum left. If anything scum would want us to think there were fewer scum to keep town offguard. And from my understanding of how a traitor works (thats to Setael) Pine would not have know there was a traitor and therefore would not have indicated "scum partners" if the game set up was 2 scum + a traitor. So I def think we have 3 scum (2 left).

Did I mention Cecily was CONFIRMED SCUM and someone needs to vote her?

[havingfitz]

EBWOP...the only way Cecily is not scum is if, FMPOV, Setael AND Faraday are scum. From the non-voters POV...they would include me in that equation.

So bub and mikemike...do you honestly think there are two scum amongst Setael, Farada and me? If not...vote Cecily. If you do think two of us are scum, please elaborate.

If Setael and Faraday are both scum I'm going to be really pissed.

[havingfitz]

Buuuuuuut...since the two of you are voting each other....that means you do not think there are 2 scum on the current Cecily wagon. And if you truly believe that and think the person you are currently voting is scum...then FYPOV...Cecily is confirmed scum.

Vote her please.

[havingfitz]

I'm not patient enough for this shyte. Someone please get in here and hammer our more than likely confirmed scum FFS!

[havingfitz]

mikemike ---- Last visited: Mon May 16, 2011 1:52 EST pm

Hey mikemike...wtf is the delay? Do you disagree that Cecily is confirmed scum and if not....why no vote. FMPOV if Cecily is not scum then Faraday and Setael BOTH are. Is that what you think?

[havingfitz]

mikemike...if you have addressed the fact that you did not attack Pine when he claimed you had not visited anyone (the night you visited Bub) could you please post a link to where.

mikemike...feel free to respond to the question above.

Also, you aren't going to get a Bub lynch. Cecily is focking confirmed scum. There isn't a focking traitor and if there was...scum wouldn't know who it was. The only chance you would have of getting a Bub lynch is to have the player formerly participating known as Cecily vote for him...and then flip Setael AND Faraday to him. I don't think that is going to happen. Whereas if Bub comes online and sees the light...and votes Cecily...then you just look all that more suspicious tomorrow. And I say tomorrow because I think there are three scum (based on Pine's farewell post).

[havingfitz]

I hope for my sanity's sake she is in fact scum. And if there was (by some miracle chance a possibility of Faraday's set up speculation being right) a traitor in the game...game over would be nice.

[havingfitz]

Mike/Cecily right? None of you are scum?

Why do you say this?

[havingfitz]

I'm assuming it's game over, and hoping you'd have the courtesy to make it quick and painful if you were some sort of traitor scum with Bub.

Likewise.

[havingfitz]

Where oh where's Rhinox tonight?
Why did he leave us here all alone?
I searched the game over and I think we found true scum.
But he didn't log in and PTHHP! we were stalled.

[havingfitz]

1) Fock
2) Nice job Faraday...did you know mikemike was a/the traitor?
3) mikemike...why didn't you hammer for the win the other day when you had the opportunity?
4) Cecily...I'm sure you are a very nice person but your play as town was terrible. If you don't have time to put into the game (ie to break up physiucs studies when you don't really have the time to commit) then don't do a disservice to those players/town who do have the time and put it into the game.
5) Fock

[havingfitz]

We knew mikemike, he didn't know us.

That would explain him not voting Cecily. Just enough uncertainty.

I made a big mistake/assumption in saying the only way Cecily could not be scum was if both Setael AND Faraday were scum (which I did not think was the case) after mikemike passed on a Cecily hammer. I was not factoring in the traitor option enough and the possibility the traitor would know scum but not vice versa.

The setup does seem a bit lopsided in favor of scum. It was definitely the main reason I accepted Faraday's claim. It fit in very well with the set up possibilities.

Did I mention "Fock!"

[havingfitz]

VOTE: Voidedmafia

[havingfitz]

Cecily....how would you rate your performance in this game?

[havingfitz]

Was there a dead QT?

[havingfitz]

btw anyone calling pappums scum here, need to re-read his play. or get used to gambits, sure theoretically it could come from scum but it was so awesome here and had such a pro town effect. good play P. Rat.

Bullshit. All it did was divert town attention from scum. The three main areas of focus out of this gambit were Void who was the gambit target, papum who executed the "gambit", and me who pappums identified as his main suspect as a result of the gambit. So townPR decides to indict townVoid and the end result of D1 is three townies have spent the entire day arguing about a lie and suspecting each other with Void getting mislynched. Yeah...it was super pro-town

Are there nominations for Most scum-beneficial town Gambit?

[havingfitz]

it did that because you guys let it, tbh.

Oh...ok. It was "pro-town" despite the result it had. That makes sense.

[havingfitz]

@fitz: Setael and Faraday are right.

That's your opinion. I disagree. You are speaking from the perspective of knowing it was a gambit while D1 unfolded. Town wasn't so fortunate. It completely derailed any legitimate scumhunting that I, Void, or pappums could have done if it hadn't occured. And knows how Setael and Faraday would have viewed it if they experienced it. Though I suspect Faraday would be of the same opinion since he would have known it was a gambit just like you did. The D1 activities only confirm my opinion that town should not lie. I admit it was ballsy and in hindsight I find it amusing, but that doesn't mean it was helpful to town.

Even though it was a town loss I still enjoyed this game a lot. It seemed to drag a lot at times which did not help but it was enjoyable nonetheless.

[havingfitz]

If you post them I'll peruse them.