Newbie 1081: Showdown in Newbtown (Game Over, Mafia win)

[alnkpa]

alnkpa, do you still find me scummy (I know I've asked this before)? If so, why? Because there's really no reason voting for me if you don't have a case.

In the moment I don't have any new evidence against you. Though I don't have any new scumreads on anyone either (I confessed in my first post that I'm bad at scumreading) so I'll just let my vote linger on you considering there doesn't seem to be a wagon on you.

Welcome to the replacements chkflip and workdawg, I got a question for you: Do you already have things that catched your eye? Maybe even things that none of us noticed yet?

[h3ll0]

Do you think that is what Bulvious was doing?

Perhaps. I'm not ruling out the option yet. That's why I'm not putting Bulvious as 'town' at the moment. To me, he is leaning town for generating plenty of discussions which are beneficial for town.

You are being obtuse. The two questions were different: I was actually advocating for a lurker lynch.

Which was pointless at that point of time. Your attempt to lurker lynch when there was plenty of time left (almost two weeks left) doesn't progress the game.

I am not accusing LynchKing of making a mistake, I am just just saying that he said something that could be interpreted as scummy, and I suspect that scum would have avoided saying it. Could I be wrong about him? Of course. He's essentially posted nothing, but if it came down to lynching him or BS, I'd prefer BS.

What you said, is at best a null-tell. I not seeing how you can call him 'leaning-town'. But it is your opinion, after all.

No, but if you were town, you'd keep scum hunting, but instead you've given that up.

Yeap. You just keep on mudslinging me. You vote me for unsubstantiated reasons, and when that fails, you simply throw everything at me. You accuse startransmission to be scummy and refuse to make a case for it, seeing me as the easier mislynch.

Unvote, Vote Zdenek

I still want more h3ll0 votes.

Then make a better case.

[Antihero]

Vote Count #8

Banana Stickers - 1 (startransmission)
Fatso - 1 (alnkpa)
h3ll0 - 1 (Zdenek)
Workdawg - 1 (Bulvious)
Zdenek - 1 (h3ll0)

Not Voting: Banana Stickers, chkflip, Fatso, Workdawg

As Banana Stickers hasn't picked up her prod, she's being replaced.

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch. Deadline is April 12th, but that might change.

[Workdawg]

Alright, I've had the chance to reread the thread again and things are a bit more clear now.

A few more thoughts...

I'm not totally sure what to think about startransmission. My initial impression is leaning town for really putting my slot under the pressure that sarahfish deserved. FWIW, I'd be more than happy to address any concerns you still have now that she's gone.

Bulvious seems town to me as well. He's really asking a lot of good questions and seems to be talking to everyone rather than just focusing on one person.

I have to say, my concerns about Zdenek only got worse though. I made some notes while I was rereading this morning and here is roughly what they say.

Post 41 - His very last comment seems a little bit like fearmongering to me. Zd (is it cool if I call you Zd?) is an SE player and maybe he knows better than I do, but I really feel like lynchkings comment there was simply trying to justify what was clearly a pressure vote. I really don't see an SE player honestly considering that a push for a quicklynch.
Post 162 - More fearmongering in accusing h3ll0 of buddying up to Bulvious. They agree on one point and that mean's they are buddying?
Post 171 - He says it's a town tell to call someone town? He "thinks" that Bulvious is town because "This is a town-tell because it's a sacrifice for scum to say that they think that someone is town..." He THINKS Bulvious is town, but he KNOWS that is a town tell? I completely disagree that it's a towntell at all. Someone else already brough this up though.

His arguments with h3ll0.

It's going to sound like I'm mirroring some of what h3ll0 said above I guess, but I started over from the beginning of the thread again and he posted the above after I went to bed last night, so I didn't even read it until just now. Zd seems to consistantly tear down points made against him in a condescnding manner. The obtuse quote above is a perfect example. As an SE player, I would have expected a lot more from him. A well constructed defense, and case for that matter. I don't feel that he has done that. On the other hand, I feel like h3ll0 has done a great job of defending himself from a more aggressive, and seemingly less substantial case.

His gameplay in general

To continue with what I mentioned about Zd before, I feel like he might not have the town's best interests in mind. He makes very short comments about everything and rarely explains himself (only when asked to). As an SE playing for town, I would expect him to try and teach a little bit more. Explain his meanings and what he feels are scumtells and what aren't. I think justifying his statements would only benefit the town, but he has stated that making long posts is "useless at best and anti-town at worst." I can see that being acceptable in a standard game, but not so much in a newbie game, and certainly not when he's an SE and he's supposed to be teaching us something.

His thoughts on startransmission (ST)

I agree with h3ll0 here again. Zd has said a couple of times that ST is "active lurking," and even voted against him because of it, but he doesn't think we'd lynch the IC D1. Because of this, he doesn't bother to post up anything resembling a case? I'm not really sure what the motivation for that is. At least not from a town perspective.

@Zd:

If you think ST is scummy, then why not present a case that indicates that? Between ST (who you previously voted for) and h3ll0 (who you are currently voting for) who do you feel is most scummy? If the former, then why not post your case? If the latter, then what has changed your mind?

[Workdawg]

Oh, I forgot...

VOTE: Zdenek

[Zdenek]

Ok. I dislike when people say that they have many comments or questions and then fail to provide them. I dislike when people feel the need to say that they will post later, and then when they do, they barely contribute to the game. Startransmission has done these things.

Either you're terribly ignorant, trying to get a rise out of me, or a liar.

Since startransmission is accusing me of lying about his activity and promises of activity. Here is an outline of his first 20 posts of the game.

Post  #0   » Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:28 pm: A reasonable first post.
Post  #1   » Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:42 pm: Asks and answers RQS questions.
Post  #2   » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:02 am: Wishes BS a happy birthday.
Post  #3   » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:34 pm: Theory discussion of RVS, and talks about the end of RVS.
Post  #4   » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:35 pm Corrects a mistake of alnkpa
Post  #5   » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:39 am: "Late night at work, will post in the morning. Much comments."
Post  #6   » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:47 am: says that Fatso's OMGUS vote is far scummier than folding under RVS pressure, and that he doesn't think that Fatso is scummy enough to warrant the wagon going further.

Note: This is essentially his first contribution to the game outside of RVS, so while he might seem like he's been active having made 7 posts. They've been almost contentless up until now.

Post  #7   » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:13 pm: repeats his first point from Post #6. Tells us that all the comments he was going to make have "kinda been made."

Post  #8   » Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:44 pm:"Hey guys, long day ahead of me, will post later today."
Post  #9   » Sun Mar 27, 2011 3:18 am: "Considering the advantages they already possess, no, not really. Keep them guessing."
Post  #10   » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:14 pm: Tells us about his work schedule, and promises content.
Post  #11   » Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:23 pm: more about work.

Note: In post 8 he felt the need to tell us that he would be posting later in the day, and after that he had a comment to make about the setup and told us about his work. Also, he has essentially said nothing since post 6.

Post  #12   » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:17 am: He is suspicious of SarahFish, and makes some reasonable points against her, but he left his vote on the inactive Banana Sitickers.
Post  #13   » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:13 am: He reminds us that his vote is still on BS, and tells us that if she continues to be inactive, then his vote on the slot will cease to be random, whether or not there is a replacement.
Post  #14   » Tue Mar 29, 2011 8:28 am: Read the rules.
Post  #15   » Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:22 pm: use the preview button, pressures SF, still doesn't vote.
Post  #16   » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:12 am: Losing patience with LK and BS.
Post  #17   » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:29 pm: More SF business.
Post  #18   » Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:56 am: Here he feels the need to answer a question that I asked to SF about why there is an 89 in her user name, policy lynching discussion and talk about the lack of moderating.
Post  #19   » Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:44 am:

Wow. This game has hit a wall. No activity whatsoever. Good for scum, bad for town.

I have some questions to ask tomorrow. Fatso's one to alnkpa above is a good start.

Up until outside of RVS, his contributions have been a little pressure on Fatso, in #6 and a soft attack on SaraFish scattered though the rest. In order to deal with his accusation that I was lying, I'd like to draw attention to Post 5, where he said that he had many comments, but then didn't provide any of them. But more importantly to Post 8, where he felt the need to tell us that he planned to post later in the day, but then didn't contribute anything of substance until post 12, more than 48 hours later.

I'd like to point out the following exchange:

I have some questions to ask tomorrow.

Then when you post again, you say nothing about anything that happened earlier, and you try to explain it away with:

I say I'm going to ask questions the next day, and you attack me for not asking them immediately. The keyword in my post was tomorrow. And when tomorrow came, I asked my questions.

as though you could predict the future about there being things available for you to ask questions about. This by the way is where you said that you have questions and then later it turned out that you didn't have any.

So I'm not one of the two lurkers now?

I distinguish between lurking and active lurking.

Hrm. And where has that pressure come from? Who has been engaging and questioning her?

Most of the people active in the game, certainly you. But you never voted her despite presenting a reasonable case; certainly one that if you actually believed it should have led you take your vote off the inactive BS.

Another reason startransmission is scummy is his failure to comment about h3ll0's recent play in his catch-up posts.

No, but if you were town, you'd keep scum hunting, but instead you've given that up.

Yeap. You just keep on mudslinging me.

Oh really, show me where you pointed out that someone was scummy since I voted you outside of RVS.

Post 41 - His very last comment seems a little bit like fearmongering to me. Zd (is it cool if I call you Zd?) is an SE player and maybe he knows better than I do, but I really feel like lynchkings comment there was simply trying to justify what was clearly a pressure vote. I really don't see an SE player honestly considering that a push for a quicklynch.

It was early and I wanted to see how he would react.

Post 162 - More fearmongering in accusing h3ll0 of buddying up to Bulvious. They agree on one point and that mean's they are buddying?

No, it was the manner of the interaction. Let me walk you through it:

Bulvious asked him a question that he had essentially just answered:

h3ll0 said:

I'm still not sold on a lurker lynch at this point of time, seeing that we still got 11 more days to the deadline (which could be extended). Sitting around and agreeing to the policy lynch does not help progress the game either.

Bulvious asks:

h3ll0, what do you think of the willingness to push a lurker lynch? Doesn't it seem odd that so many people would want to agree to that when it's usually a 50/50 sort of split in the average game? Normally you get SOME people contesting it - but there's none of that in this game. Could it be that two of the scum are the most ardent in pushing the most useless wagon and keeping that on-topic?

Notice that Bulvious asks a couple of questions there. Someone who was honestly answering would have responded to them. However, h3ll0's response is:

Exactly. This "policy lynch' thing has done nothing but distracted all of us from actual scum-hunting. Especially considering that the lurker lynch policy has already been agreed on earlier when you asked your question on who to hammer.

He agrees with something that Bulvious said, it's not clear with what, and goes on to reiterate his point from his previous post. It's simply mindless agreement with nothing in particular.

Then in the same post he congratulates Bulvious on a "good catch" regarding Alnkpa.

Workdawg: SE is not a teaching role, and since you disagree with nearly everything that I think, that is probably a good thing.

As an SE player, I would have expected a lot more from him. A well constructed defense, and case for that matter.

What exactly are you asking me to defend myself against?

As far as cases go, my thoughts are in my posts, you can read them there.

Explain his meanings and what he feels are scumtells and what aren't.

What would you like me to explain?

@Zd: If you think ST is scummy, then why not present a case that indicates that? Between ST (who you previously voted for) and h3ll0 (who you are currently voting for) who do you feel is most scummy? If the former, then why not post your case? If the latter, then what has changed your mind?

startransmission's activity has picked up, which makes me feel better about him now, but I don't like that he didn't feel that h3ll0's recent play was worth commenting on. Since you seem to want explanations, scum know who is scum and town and don't have any reason to try to determine people's alignments, so they will ignore arguments between town essentially because they don't care what the outcome is. They will also avoid commenting about arguments involving one of their scum buddies to avoid creating connections with them.

My issues with h3ll0 are recent and easy to find in my ISO, and I would prefer his lynch to st's.

[Workdawg]

Post 162 - More fearmongering in accusing h3ll0 of buddying up to Bulvious. They agree on one point and that mean's they are buddying?

No, it was the manner of the interaction. Let me walk you through it:
-snip-

Ahh, see... I interpretted it differently. The post in question is 154, quoted here for ease of reference:

I'm not entirely sure anyone has been doing much scum-hunting for some time, though. It's mostly been "Let's lurker lynch" - all fine and good, but that's something for the future.

-Snip-

h3ll0, what do you think of the willingness to push a lurker lynch? Doesn't it seem odd that so many people would want to agree to that when it's usually a 50/50 sort of split in the average game? Normally you get SOME people contesting it - but there's none of that in this game. Could it be that two of the scum are the most ardent in pushing the most useless wagon and keeping that on-topic?

Exactly. This "policy lynch' thing has done nothing but distracted all of us from actual scum-hunting. Especially considering that the lurker lynch policy has already been agreed on earlier when you asked your question on who to hammer.

Alnpka is actively lurking - to me, this is significantly worse than someone who is likely to be replaced.

He has provided no original content. The most he's done is accuse Fatso of backing down and being sensetive - accusations that were parroted from other players in this game. He appears to merely be agreeing with people - a good move for scum. He's not hunting at all either, let us not forget that.

Good catch. I want to see Alnpk's reaction to that.

It looks to me like h3ll0's first comment "Exactly... " is only refering to the top of Bulvious' statement (above the "-snip-"). I don't see h3ll0 actually answering Bulvious' questions there.

The "Good catch" comment is insignificant, IMO.

Workdawg: SE is not a teaching role, and since you disagree with nearly everything that I think, that is probably a good thing.
....

What would you like me to explain?

My only other game here, the SE players did take on a teaching type of role, though I see from the wiki that you are correct.

I guess I wasn't really looking for an explanation for anything specifically, but based on my (incorrect) assumption that an SE was supposed to teach, I would have expected an SE to explain themselves more.

Very well then.

[chkflip]

For those that have jumped on the erratic Zdenek, you might find this town-meta interesting as he played the same in the linked game as he's playing now. Not to say that he doesn't just always play this touch-and-go just to keep himself "even," but I find Zd to be the most town right now. Especially after this last post.

Startransmission has been an eye-opener for me as well, but not in the good way. I don't quite understand how you can justify keeping an RVS vote on someone and try to say that it becomes valid after they disappear. Then what happens when there's a replacement and they play most satisfactorily than BS? You're null. Yes, you say you'll remove the vote, but what good does it do to keep your vote there? This reminds me of an ongoing game I was just NK'ed in where one of the players completely

refused

to vote D1 because the mislynch rate is more often than not.

In other words, I think you're trying to get away with simply not voting for as long as you can so we have little to nothing to go off of if we were to do a VCA (Vote Count Analysis) or even try to pair you with someone through votes. Yes, there are other ways to interact, but you (as an IC) should know very well that voting is a key component to D1 and not doing so is less than optimal. I too find your "Oh, yeah, I'm working a lot so I'll get back to this" interesting in the sense that it's obvious you're not even trying. Can you kindly point me to who "already answered" things for you?

I can't say that I particularly agree with your rushing RVS either as it can give us vital information to start D1 with. Do you know who else doesn't like RVS lasting too long? Scum. I understand if it's been a week and you want to get the show on the road... but you said it at the bottom of

page one

. Jump the gun much?

You also Fluff a lot of worthless information out there. The comments "bullshit" and "What catch? :dumbeyerollemote:" are superfluous in every sense and most of the rest of your post here can be assumed. Particularly your "leading question" comment to Bul, which I see brought out at least a little bit of interesting conversation. If you flip scum, I think know who I'll be heading for next.

Accusations of partnership have never been all that bad... unless you're scum and that's your actual partner. Or you're scum and you want us to think that's your partner after the flip. I'll ignore the fact that you think PL discussion means anything in a NEWB game, but your defense on your BS vote and Sarah conversation are less than great. The fact that your vote is STILL on BS is outrageous especially since there's at least ONE person out of this crowd that you could find scummy and form a case on. But you're not really actively scumhunting at all, you're just attempting to look like you are.

VOTE: startransmission

I'll happily point out more of your scumminess in the future, I just don't like posting walls as they're oft ignored.

[startransmission]

I have some questions to ask tomorrow.

Then when you post again, you say nothing about anything that happened earlier, and you try to explain it away with:

I say I'm going to ask questions the next day, and you attack me for not asking them immediately. The keyword in my post was tomorrow. And when tomorrow came, I asked my questions.

as though you could predict the future about there being things available for you to ask questions about. This by the way is where you said that you have questions and then later it turned out that you didn't have any.

I can absolutely predict that I'll have questions. Whatever questions I may have wound up asking had nobody posted before the next day probably would've had to do with Alnpka and/or Fatso. As it turned out Alnpka was questioned and received pressure independently, and the exchange between h3llo and Bulvious was far more interesting to me. So that's where I directed my questions.

Most of the people active in the game, certainly you. But you never voted her despite presenting a reasonable case; certainly one that if you actually believed it should have led you take your vote off the inactive BS.

I never voted her because I didn't think there was a strong enough case. I was suspicious, I voiced those suspicions, and I questioned SF about them. I didn't feel a vote was necessary, especially considering that she was responding to me. The result of the pressure on her (including votes from others) and her response to it was my feeling that she was more likely newbtown as opposed to somebody posing as a 12yr old girl in order to create a meta. It actually got to the point that I would've argued against her potential lynch.

Another reason startransmission is scummy is his failure to comment about h3ll0's recent play in his catch-up posts.

Yes, I should have addressed it yesterday, I just don't have a strong opinion yet. I've made clear what I feel about the interaction between Bulvious and h3llo in posts 153 and 154. That interaction has put them both at the top of my suspect list. You've settled on the process of elimination, which I suppose if fine, but it's not good enough for me. In my mind I can't eliminate either of them as possible scum. As for the debate between h3llo and yourself, I don't find anything terribly suspicious from either of you. There is disagreement as to what each of you consider valid towntells. Null tell. There's him saying that you said lynchking was pro-town, when in fact you did not. You call this a misrep, but I don't see a scummy intention. The same goes for accusing you of fence-sitting. While that is inaccurate, I feel that his point was he didn't like you calling a player suspicious but not pursuing it because of IC status. An intentional misrep? I'm not thinking so at the moment.

In the end I don't think you present a strong enough case to convince others, at least not me, and I'm already suspicious of him. His reaction to the pressure from you doesn't clear him of being scum in my mind, but it doesn't do anything to incriminate him either. What I will do, need to do, is reread both Bulvious and h3llo from start to present. I'll see if anything jumps out at me.

[startransmission]

Startransmission has been an eye-opener for me as well, but not in the good way. I don't quite understand how you can justify keeping an RVS vote on someone and try to say that it becomes valid after they disappear. Then what happens when there's a replacement and they play most satisfactorily than BS? You're null. Yes, you say you'll remove the vote, but what good does it do to keep your vote there? This reminds me of an ongoing game I was just NK'ed in where one of the players completely

refused

to vote D1 because the mislynch rate is more often than not.

I have never once advocated a no lynch, and have fiercely fought against them in the past. I don't see the comparison of me not moving my vote to a player who wouldn't vote.

In other words, I think you're trying to get away with simply not voting for as long as you can so we have little to nothing to go off of if we were to do a VCA (Vote Count Analysis) or even try to pair you with someone through votes.

I don't throw my vote around. Never have. I will vote for somebody in the RVS (that would be BS in this game) and typically not move that vote until I find/create a wagon that I find worthy. I did not find SF worthy. Had my RV been on somebody else I would not have found BS worthy, but my vote was already there so it wasn't a calorie burner to keep it there for reasons that became non random.

Yes, there are other ways to interact, but you (as an IC) should know very well that voting is a key component to D1 and not doing so is less than optimal.

I have never not voted on D1. I have never (in my recollection) ended a day without my vote and my reasoning being on the person I'm most suspicious of.

I too find your "Oh, yeah, I'm working a lot so I'll get back to this" interesting in the sense that it's obvious you're not even trying. Can you kindly point me to who "already answered" things for you?

Not trying? I guess this goes back to the debate between me and ZD but I feel I have been trying. I have been active, I have voiced my concerns, and have asked questions that I feel are pertinent. For me, I get more information on players by doing that than throwing my vote at everybody I have a concern about. Again, it's fine to feel that my posts don't have any value, but I would disagree. As far as "already answered" things... what are you referring to?

I can't say that I particularly agree with your rushing RVS either as it can give us vital information to start D1 with. Do you know who else doesn't like RVS lasting too long? Scum. I understand if it's been a week and you want to get the show on the road... but you said it at the bottom of

page one

. Jump the gun much?

Did I rush RVS? I don't think I did. What I did do is point out that I liked RVS as a way of getting a game going. I also introduced the RQS, and pointed out that I found that a less valuable method of getting a game going but worth doing anyways. And where do you get that scum don't like RVS lasting too long? That's never been my experience. RVS is designed to get a game going, the sooner it does that the better. Most experienced players appreciate a brief RVS, it benefits town. And yes, when a player votes for another player for reasons that are not random, that does typically end an RVS.

You also Fluff a lot of worthless information out there. The comments "bullshit" and "What catch? :dumbeyerollemote:" are superfluous in every sense and most of the rest of your post here can be assumed.

The rest of my post can be assumed? I don't understand that. And my comments aren't superfluous, they convey how I feel about what was said in a post. My opinion on that post(s) was important for me to express.

Particularly your "leading question" comment to Bul, which I see brought out at least a little bit of interesting conversation. If you flip scum, I think know who I'll be heading for next.

What? Me accusing Bulvious of asking h3llo a leading question gives you insight on who my partner would be if I was scum? Care to elaborate?

Accusations of partnership have never been all that bad... unless you're scum and that's your actual partner. Or you're scum and you want us to think that's your partner after the flip. I'll ignore the fact that you think PL discussion means anything in a NEWB game, but your defense on your BS vote and Sarah conversation are less than great.

I'm pointing out what I see as a possible partnership between Bulvious and h3llo. It's a fairly glaring example, and I'm not the only one who feels that way. As discussing it

could

lead to one or more scum, it's worth doing. It's putthem both at the top of my potential scum totem pole. I'm not sure where you're coming up with the theory that I'm scum and one of h3llo or Bulvious is my partner...or I'm trying to make it look that way... your point here is convoluted.

Unvote

When I see or build a case that's worthy of a vote, I'll place a vote. Not before.

[Bulvious]

Thus far I like Workdawg's play and find it very pro-town, thus.

Unvote

If you flip scum, I think know who I'll be heading for next.

Out of curiosity - whom? Additionally, are you implying that Startrans is going to be lynched today, or that it's your intent?

Zdenek, is this the case you've been hoping for to get your bead on ST? You failed to give a case previously "just cos it wouldn't have a result."


Really though, Startransmission. While it doesn't appear Zdenek's case against h3ll0 was great, Chkflip's and Zdenek's joint case against you is very convincing.

But at this point I'm still willing to believe that ST is merely a busy man lacking in time. Chkflip, to shorten up your post a little bit - three of the biggest reasons ST is scummy?



And also

ST:
When I see or build a case that's worthy of a vote, I'll place a vote. Not before.

And when exactly will THIS occur? Because at the moment you aren't actively building any cases, and you certainly aren't trying to get scum to slip. So what ARE you doing? Reacting for the moment, it appears.

[Bulvious]

Erm, first quote was Chkflip, second was Startransmission.

[chkflip]

[quote=ST]I never voted her because I didn't think there was a strong enough case.[/quote]
[quote=ST]That interaction has put them both at the top of my suspect list.[/quote]
These statements are a contradiction to what

was

your current vote.

It wasn't that I was trying to imply that you're not trying, I was trying to imply that you're not trying hard enough. We can agree to disagree on that point, however, and move on.

The comparison between you and the NL-pusher is what I've already said. Neither of you are creating much for town to gain from in your voting patterns. That person had their vote on No Lynch all D1 and you've had your vote on an in-active player (basically taking a vote away from what could be a real lynch) up until this point; that was the comparison, but I'm happy with your defense as my pressure vote has done its job.

UNVOTE: startransmission

It wasn't that you so much rushed RVS as you implied that the game should get moving much faster than I would've preferred at that point. In my own experiences, I've seen scum rush out of an RVS and sometimes go so far as to be the first "serious" voter. If they can successfully push RVS out of the way, they can successfully push their first mislynch that much faster as well.

The "leading question" bit could be a soft-defense for a scum partner, or it could just be you wearing your IC hat. I have a feeling that it's more the latter than the former now that I look back on it.

As far as my "convoluted point" goes it appears my reactionfishing has helped

me

, at least.

@Bul: I was in fact implying that, but it wasn't my real intention. If ST is scum, I find that his soft-defending/mentoring could be connected to at least two, if not three players.

[chkflip]

EBWODP:

I never voted her because I didn't think there was a strong enough case.

That interaction has put them both at the top of my suspect list.

These statements are a contradiction to what was your current vote.

[Bulvious]

Why did you unvote him?

[Bulvious]

Ah, nevermind, I caught it.

[Fatso]

Wow... my busiest day, and people decide to make huge posts.
Only had time to quickly read through this, but at the moment both Zd and ST seem town to me. Zd also said some stuff that made me think maybe h3llo was scum.
Both chkflip and Workdawg seem townish to me at the moment, but then again they've hardly been in long enough to seem particularly scummy.
It's 6 days to deadline, right? That's what I counted.

[Antihero]

drmyshottyizsik replaces Banana Stickers. And that's all for replacements for now!

[Zdenek]

As an SE player, I would have expected a lot more from him. A well constructed defense, and case for that matter.

What exactly are you asking me to defend myself against?

I repeat.

Zdenek, is this the case you've been hoping for to get your bead on ST? You failed to give a case previously "just cos it wouldn't have a result."

It was an explanation of why I accused him of active lurking earlier, and some other things.

I don't particularly like that chkflip made a fairly convincing argument against st, seems to still be suspicious of him, but unvoted simply because st defended himself adequately.

Alnkpa is looking worse to me.

Seeing this conversation almost came to a halt, I'd like to pose some questions in order to let it stay alive.
Fatso, do you really think that you can project from a real world game of mafia to this board? In which way?
H3llo, do you agree with Fatso that one of the three mentioned by him (which includes you) might be scum? Who? Why?
Zdenek, would you like to defense against Fatso's arguments? How?

At the time of his post, conversation had not come to a halt (there had been a few hours without posts). He asks questions that have little to do with people's alignments and are generally pointless, and doesn't offer up his own thoughts. He asks me to defend against Fatso's arguments, but never clarifies exactly what he is asking about.

In the moment I don't have any new evidence against you. Though I don't have any new scumreads on anyone either (I confessed in my first post that I'm bad at scumreading) so I'll just let my vote linger on you considering there doesn't seem to be a wagon on you.

Welcome to the replacements chkflip and workdawg, I got a question for you: Do you already have things that catched your eye? Maybe even things that none of us noticed yet?

He lets he vote sit somewhere useless (he clearly knows that it is useless since he points out that there isn't a wagon on Fatso), and he isn't trying to find suspects.

From earlier, he had one ok reason to be suspicious of Fatso (that Fatso seemed sensitive; although it's up for debate whether Fatso was actually being sensitive), but he additionally accused Fatso of being scum for posting several times in a row, which is needless bulking up of a case against someone:

Well Fatso, until now I didn't have you on my personal scum list, but now as you being quite sensitive about some accusations made against you I do. Although you were rather talkative the whole game you now seem to exaggerate. So many consecutive posts seem rather scummy to me. Why did you need to have 3 posts in a row to answer some questions?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Fatso

[startransmission]

I'm going to elaborate more on the following when I'm not drunk and tired, but in the meantime,

Thus far I like Workdawg's play and find it very pro-town, thus.

Do you? I don't necessarily disagree, but I find this interesting.

Zdenek, is this the case you've been hoping for to get your bead on ST? You failed to give a case previously "just cos it wouldn't have a result."

Is that what he said? I know why one would think that's what he implied, but did he use those exact words? He may have... not in the mood to ISO at this late hour. Just doesn't seem right, I hope you're not putting words into peoples mouths.

Really though, Startransmission. While it doesn't appear Zdenek's case against h3ll0 was great, Chkflip's and Zdenek's joint case against you is very convincing.

Oh is it? Very convincing? Also interesting.

But at this point I'm still willing to believe that ST is merely a busy man lacking in time. Chkflip, to shorten up your post a little bit - three of the biggest reasons ST is scummy?

Keeping options open, while asking somebody else to build a case for him.

And also

ST:
When I see or build a case that's worthy of a vote, I'll place a vote. Not before.

And when exactly will THIS occur? Because at the moment you aren't actively building any cases, and you certainly aren't trying to get scum to slip. So what ARE you doing? Reacting for the moment, it appears.

I told you very clearly when I'll place a vote. I'm not "actively building any cases"... well I don't consider throwing votes at people scumhunting/building cases. Anyone can do that. Not trying to get scum to slip? The entire point of my interaction with SF was to feel her out (sounds dirty, I know) and try to get her to slip. Her reaction led me to lean town where she was concerned. Hence my not voting for her.

There's more to say, but it's late. Tomorrow morning/afternoon. Before work!

[chkflip]

This was originally one enormous post; instead, I've broken it down.

1. What's your Mafia experience?
2. What's your favorite band?
3. What role/alignment do you prefer?
4. Do you find it harder finding scum, or convincing other people that you've found scum (the latter assuming you correctly identified someone as scum)?

UNO] I was a VI over at another forum but only because their way of playing this game is biased and twisted. After getting over here, though, I've gotten quite a bit better at the whole song and dance. Timewise, I'd say I'm roughly six months deep.

DOS] Which genre? Johnny Cash (Country), Dead Kennedys (Punk), Ozzy Ozbourne (Rock), Dethklok (Metal), Dr. Dre (Hip Hop), Lady GaGa (Pop), Usher (R&B), and we'll round it off with Vivaldi (Classical) and Charlie Parker (Jazz).

What's the point in asking this question?

TRES] Anything but vanilla townie, but that's what I'm given more often than not. O.o

QUATRO] I find an equal difficulty in both. Sometimes people do stupid things or flail too soon and it's easy; often times, however, this can't be further from the case.

One question to the SEs/IC:
How do you vote in RVS? Rather one vote to stick to it or switching ones?

I tend to be completely random. Sometimes it helps to jump around and get discussion going, but you'll oft find that doing that can bring unwanted attention to yourself.

Side notes: Al is my strongest town read for this, this, and this and will no longer get silly kjdghdfjgh nicknames from me anymore.

Zd... I said it was a reactionfish. Is what you're suspecting of me

not

the definition of reactionfishing?

IGMEOY

Workdawg, if only because your predecessor completely overlooked several things, completely ignored Fatso here, and your current stance on Fatso doesn't sit well with my gut in correlation. Their open-ended question here also sits uneasy with me as, from my experience, scum are more often to ask "HEY GUIEZ WHO'S SCUM" than town would. Noting the WIFOM response to star's noticing the soft-defense, as well.

[chkflip]

WTF TL;DR -- Being overly defensive, defeatist, sheeping, NOT scumhunting, flailing, buddying, and lying, amongst several other (slightly less pertinent) points.

CHK's Fatso case:

Fatso, you're very defensive for it being so early in the game here and you seem a bit abrasive to alkrerrih here. ST made it pretty obvious who the question was aimed at ten minutes prior, why rub it in? That's only a minute point next to what your actual response to his inquiry is for the simple fact that you're completely misrepping what you actually said to appear more town than you actually are. Lets compare:

I don't like RVS very much, so I'm not voting until I see an

actual scummy post

.

Anyways, my opinion wasn't "I totally hate RVS and I'm never voting in it. EVER." It was "I don't like RVS that much, so I'm not going to vote right off the bat, but if it's really that important to you, I guess I will."

LOLWUT?

Your reaction, as priceless as it is, screams scum from my gut. It's obv Zd was talking about your appeasement to the beast that is RVS. And of course you try to jump on your first chance to get the wagon turning by voting for someone who placed a random vote on you. You continue to flail before LK answers your question with ease.

Being defeatist doesn't make you appear any more town.

Flailing again? And who cares that noone else is scumhunting? That's not in question as of that moment; the question was whether or not

YOU

were scumhunting... and you hadn't. At all. OMGUS vote doesn't count. If I was in the game at this point, believe you me there'd be a lynch-rope at L-1 with your name etched in it.

Damn it... that's what Bul said. Well, I'm not deleting it. Especially since your response very obviously states that you're missing the point entirely. I almost cackled when you named Bul as your top suspect for putting some pressure on you.

BUDDYING instead of scumhunting only one post later... are you serious?

Lying is never good, either. "I never said I wouldn't RV"? REALLY? Because that's exactly what you said from my side of the screen. You said you wouldn't vote until you saw an

"actual scummy post"

... to which you contradict yourself by voting three times without much (beyond OMGUS) merit.

You continue to "scumhunt" people that aren't as active as they should be... why not just try to actually, you know, get a response from someone that's playing the game? Jumping from lurker to lurker isn't making me think you're town. At all.

Your soft-defending sarah is out of nowhere and made me actually cackle after I realized you said (from your own experience) "the only people who defend town are scum"

And you never cease to amaze me by continuing to vote lurkers. Did you get much of anything out of that? Just curious.

Then you talk about F11... right after a juicy response post from Zd? As much as I don't want to think this is a scumtell, it reads to me like you're avoiding the discussion until you can come up with something. And that something is just sheeping what has already been said. Yes, there are only so many opinions you can have on certain things, but that response is pure fluffy-sheepery.

[sarcasm] I love that your top suspects are the lurkers. At least you're consistent. [/sarcasm] Your reasons aren't anything outside of fluffed "they're lurking," IMO. You shouldn't be GUESSING about your opinion, either it's one way or it's the other.

...I just can't even fathom how you said <--that at all. Why do you need examples for something YOU TYPED?

Out of all the absolute ridiculousness that comes from you, it's this lurker vote that screams scum a little louder than the rest of them. WHY. WHYWHYWHWHYWHY are you continuously voting for lurkers when it's page SIX and there are SEVERAL things you could be scumhunting into and getting real responses from? WHY are you still failing at this scumhunting thing? There are only two answers I can come up with that make any sense. One, you're retarded, or two, you're scum. I sincerely find it an insult to the mentally handicapped to label you as the former, so you're the latter.

FOS'ing a lurker for things they very obviously didn't see.

A REAL VOTE!? Holy CRAP, I didn't think you had it in you boy. But... your next post doesn't mention sarah at all. Sure, it's because "she wasn't as involved in the discussion" as you'd say, but why vote someone and not try to follow-up on them at all? Not even a question for Sarah in either post, really? Not even a comment in her direction after she posts? Then nothing at all? No.

Never in my life have I seen a townie as worried about a single vote as you are here; therefore, you're not town.

[chkflip]

VOTE: Fatso

[h3ll0]

Oh really, show me where you pointed out that someone was scummy since I voted you outside of RVS.

Er, Sarahfish? Though, yeah. I really need to go do some more scumhunting.

Notice that Bulvious asks a couple of questions there. Someone who was honestly answering would have responded to them. However, h3ll0's response is:

Exactly. This "policy lynch' thing has done nothing but distracted all of us from actual scum-hunting. Especially considering that the lurker lynch policy has already been agreed on earlier when you asked your question on who to hammer.

He agrees with something that Bulvious said, it's not clear with what, and goes on to reiterate his point from his previous post. It's simply mindless agreement with nothing in particular.

I'm agreeing with this part of Bulvious's post:

I'm not entirely sure anyone has been doing much scum-hunting for some time, though. It's mostly been "Let's lurker lynch" - all fine and good, but that's something for the future.

Which you conveniently left out from your post.

My issues with h3ll0 are recent and easy to find in my ISO, and I would prefer his lynch to st's.

You have an ISO on me? Which post are you referring to? All your points against me are pretty spread out from what I see.

chkflip has put up an interesting case on fatso. Going to do a re-read before commenting.

[Bulvious]

For my reasons posted before, and Zdenek's reasons...

Vote: Alnpka