Mini 1137: Long Overdue Mafia [Game Over!]

[Setael]

Your objection did not allay my suspicion of your original statement enough to warrant mentioning it.

Well, at least you're admitting to being an ass.

How do you figure? Or is this just straight up ad-hom?

If I included every response or objection to every point I put in my original post, it would've been 3 times as long. Clearly, anything said to refute the points I listed did not require me posting them. Just because you addressed a point doesn't mean it didn't happen and it certainly doesn't mean I have to address you addressing it, especially if I didn't find your argument that convincing. (Also, fyi - I find that scum do this quite often, wanting the points against them dropped just because they addressed it. Town does sometimes too, but scum more so. So there's that.)

I don't think that saying someone "seems town" is quite as strong as a declaration. At the time Pine seemed to be contributing, later events and the posts of others gave me a different feeling.

One of the posts that made me doubt Pine.

Do you see why a gut town feel several pages previously might have seemed less like something to rely on with posts like this?

When I was replacing in Pine seemed fairly town to me, many little things had made me trust my initial feeling much less. Therefore he was now on the "less town" side of my list.

Why did you never mention this about any of his posts? You avoided interacting with him and unless I missed it, you never mentioned that your read on him was changing and never questioned these things that supposedly were changing your read. Why not?

-pine 364 scummy - discusses mafia strategy and then unvotes and revotes pappums. fluff disguised as content

Didn't notice that before. Why would scum do that?

Are you asking me? Or is this a rhetorical question meant to make us doubt that PineScum would do this?

It seems odd that you'd be asking me since the answer is in the post you just quoted, but if you are I'll clarify - like I said I think the whole post is fluff disguised as content. That's something scum does to look like they're contributing without having to post anything that might draw attention to them or that could help the town later when they flip.

The post he referred to as waffling was a layout of the potential outcome of the lynch (had fitz or rat been lynched) and the motivations. I did respond to it being called fluff by trying to explain why I had though it through - if one of those two had been killed by this point I would be using that reasoning to think about the other's likely alignment. I was not at that point willing to put someone to L2 or higher, there was no need to respond to the "more voting" part (I did vote lateron the grounds that my vote wouldn't do any harm being on some other suspicious player as I weighed up the existing wagons). Responding to that post and Neil's at the same time is not the same as ignoring.

It's not that you ignored it entirely, it's that you avoided any interaction with Pine. You didn't address his post at all which you're much more likely to do if he's your scum buddy imo. Especially if you were starting to find him scummier like you say, your avoidance of him is telling.

I missed this post. Guess this means if we lynch Pine and he's scum(which presently seems likely) then we can take it that there's only one left. Nice.

What makes you think there wouldn't be a 3rd - a traitor or something like that? Do you and Pine have strong PRs which makes you think it's just you 2?

-Post 504 TO votes Pine without giving a reason and says she’ll move her vote “to where it will count” the next day. Pretty obvious and poor attempt at distancing.

Pine was obviously not a likely candidate for actual lynching on Day 1. Pine was still a bit suspicious and it did no harm there.

The only reason you'd vote someone just because they're not a likely lynch candidate and because it does no harm there is if you're scum buddies and you want to distance. That's my point, which you've just confirmed.

Neil asked voided if there’s a way to test her role claim. This was a townie mindset.

I agree. But the way Voided wanted them to not reveal seems counterproductive to the idea that neighborizing would prove town-ness.

What is your motivation in saying this? Are you trying to undermine my town read of Neil? Or are you saying this is why you did not ask about testing the role claim? Or are you saying this as a reason for your read on Voided yesterday? Please clarify.

[tarsonisocelot]

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.

My thinking for putting my vote there was that it would be the most pressure that could be put on Pine, and that the sheer scumminess of hammering at this point in the day would either stop scum from doing so or give us a good idea of who to lynch tomorrow/give a vig a target that's pretty much confirmed scum.

[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?

[tarsonisocelot]

I don't think that saying someone "seems town" is quite as strong as a declaration. At the time Pine seemed to be contributing, later events and the posts of others gave me a different feeling.

One of the posts that made me doubt Pine.

Do you see why a gut town feel several pages previously might have seemed less like something to rely on with posts like this?

When I was replacing in Pine seemed fairly town to me, many little things had made me trust my initial feeling much less. Therefore he was now on the "less town" side of my list.

Why did you never mention this about any of his posts? You avoided interacting with him and unless I missed it, you never mentioned that your read on him was changing and never questioned these things that supposedly were changing your read. Why not?

My first list after reading the thread gave provisional reads, which were gradual made more or less certain by posters actions. I commented only on ones that seemed particularly relevant at the time because I did not have time to give a detailed analytical update whenever two players switched places in my "mental scale of scum likelihood". Pine was not a focus for most of them so going through and giving a detailed "this is why I have a different feeling now" would not have been useful. I gave more frequent updates of my feelings about the main wagons.

I didn't change my read from "a little scummy" to "almost certain scum" until the hammer, and I hardly avoided that issue, did I?

-pine 364 scummy - discusses mafia strategy and then unvotes and revotes pappums. fluff disguised as content

Didn't notice that before. Why would scum do that?

Are you asking me? Or is this a rhetorical question meant to make us doubt that PineScum would do this?

I'm asking as someone who still doesn't really understand why any player would do an unvote/vote of the same player post.

It seems odd that you'd be asking me since the answer is in the post you just quoted, but if you are I'll clarify - like I said I think the whole post is fluff disguised as content. That's something scum does to look like they're contributing without having to post anything that might draw attention to them or that could help the town later when they flip.

The post he referred to as waffling was a layout of the potential outcome of the lynch (had fitz or rat been lynched) and the motivations. I did respond to it being called fluff by trying to explain why I had though it through - if one of those two had been killed by this point I would be using that reasoning to think about the other's likely alignment. I was not at that point willing to put someone to L2 or higher, there was no need to respond to the "more voting" part (I did vote lateron the grounds that my vote wouldn't do any harm being on some other suspicious player as I weighed up the existing wagons). Responding to that post and Neil's at the same time is not the same as ignoring.

It's not that you ignored it entirely, it's that you avoided any interaction with Pine. You didn't address his post at all which you're much more likely to do if he's your scum buddy imo. Especially if you were starting to find him scummier like you say, your avoidance of him is telling.

I'm not sure how you interpret answering the questions asked by Pine as avoiding interaction with Pine.

I missed this post. Guess this means if we lynch Pine and he's scum(which presently seems likely) then we can take it that there's only one left. Nice.

What makes you think there wouldn't be a 3rd - a traitor or something like that? Do you and Pine have strong PRs which makes you think it's just you 2?

I'm not scum. I have no idea how many scum there might be. If Pine flips scum then, given that post, it seems likely that there may be only one mafia left (though there may also be an SK I guess I'm not really sure what traitors do).

-Post 504 TO votes Pine without giving a reason and says she’ll move her vote “to where it will count” the next day. Pretty obvious and poor attempt at distancing.

Pine was obviously not a likely candidate for actual lynching on Day 1. Pine was still a bit suspicious and it did no harm there.

The only reason you'd vote someone just because they're not a likely lynch candidate and because it does no harm there is if you're scum buddies and you want to distance. That's my point, which you've just confirmed.

Or because it gives an indication of who I currently am suspicious of, at that point there were a couple of people I might have voted for until I was willing o commit fully to a main wagon - which I didn't want to do until necessary so i would have to most information when making my decision.

Neil asked voided if there’s a way to test her role claim. This was a townie mindset.

I agree. But the way Voided wanted them to not reveal seems counterproductive to the idea that neighborizing would prove town-ness.

What is your motivation in saying this? Are you trying to undermine my town read of Neil? Or are you saying this is why you did not ask about testing the role claim? Or are you saying this as a reason for your read on Voided yesterday? Please clarify.

This was saying nothing about Neil. Voided, in asking to neighbor to not claim, was asking to be allowed to forma some kind of semi-covert alliance with another player (I thought yesterday with a scumbuddy, but obv. not.) without us thinking it suspicious.

You still seem to think that answering a players questions == avoiding that player. Why does that seem odd to me?

[Setael]

You still seem to think that answering a players questions == avoiding that player. Why does that seem odd to me?

If I had to guess, it's because you're desperately looking for a reason to be suspicious of me.

Can you please quote where you answered pine's questions? I'm not referring to any question he asked you so I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm talking about where he accused you of waffling and told you to vote and you ignored him. You say that you explained your post better as a response to him, but that's not how you would've responded if you were town who was getting a stronger and stronger scum read on him. It IS how you'd respond to avoid interacting too much with a scum buddy.

I don't think you should be today's lynch, as much of my suspicion of you relies on Pine being scum. I'll come back to you after he flips scum. (Or if Pine flips scum and I get NK'd tonight the rest of you better revisit the pine-TO connection since it's pretty glaring.)

[neil1113]

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.

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, 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.

[Bub Bidderskins]

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.

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, 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.

Pro-tip: When accusing somebody of doing something, it's best to not be doing it yourself. Case in point: in the very same post that you accuse me of tunneling, you yourself admit to tunneling. Hypocracy much? Furthermore, you tell me to do real scum hunting in a post where you don't do any real scumhunting. This post doesn't ask any player tough questions, doesn't pressure any player, doesn't attempt to find scum in any way. All it is trying to do is to get two people of his back, a very scum mentality. You spend a whole massive paragraph attacking a player that you yourself say is town.

Neil, you say that I have no case on you, and yet a few posts ago you had this to say:

I can see your actually trying, or appearing to be trying, So I give you credit for that. However, you have no case against me sir so I see no reason to warrant a response. The only answer I could give you is WIFOM because your case is WIFOM.

Thus admitting that I have a case (if a WIFOM-y one) while at the same time saying I don't have. I asked you several times how my case was WIFOM, and you have yet to respond. I asked you in my last post what you thought of Pine and you have yet to respond. You see Neil, the thing with you is that you are constantly contradicting yourself and you only respond to people when they attack you. You are always defensive, and attack people who you think are town. That, my friend, is a scummy mindset. My vote is set.

[P.T. Barnum]

(Also, fyi - I find that scum do this quite often, wanting the points against them dropped just because they addressed it. Town does sometimes too, but scum more so. So there's that.)

And I find replacement-scum often bring up an old, irrelevant point and imply that the accused player ignored it. I'm not saying his argument was wrong because I objected to it; it's wrong because the content of my objections made it obsolete, since it was a very bad arguments to begin with. If you don't think that, I'd love to hear why.
And the idea that you couldn't quote my response in your original post because you were worried about its length is irritating to the extreme. Don't bother with integrity, bullshit is briefer. Give me a break.

[Setael]

And I find replacement-scum often bring up an old, irrelevant point and imply that the accused player ignored it.

What is this? How is it old and irrelevant just because you addressed it? And how did I imply that you ignored it? I listed a LOT of posts I thought were scummy and rarely if ever mentioned anyone addressing them. What makes you so special? And nice little veiled accusation that I'm scum there. You really think I'm scum JUST because I didn't pay homage to you addressing that?

Here's the main reason I don't give your response to mike much weight. You said this yesterday:

We should vote who we want to vote until we're under the pressure of a deadline (six days does not qualify) or there is a compelling reason to end the day (there isn't)

.

And yet, in spite of making that statement you did exactly the opposite re: voided. If you really thought his claim was enough to lynch him then he'd have been who you wanted to be voting. You'd have fought for that wagon. Instead, you voted andrew and basically said "I don't have any faith in this wagon, so when it gets closer to deadline I'll hop on the largest wagon." (Bolded below):

I like lynches on these two. I don't know which is more likely to get a wagon, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say andrew, just because Pine is still a fresh face. If there's interest in Pine I'll switch immediately.

Vote: andrew

Come deadline time, if we continue to limit our choices to fitz and pappums, I'll vote pappums, as I've already said. But I hope that can be avoided.

When you vote Nacho, the only reason you give is that you don't think fitz is scum so you better jump on the Nacho wagon! Here's the post:

Everyone else not voting Fitz/Nacho: Guys, there's three days left, and we'll no lynch if Fitz or Nacho aren't lynched. Unless you can whip up some amazing case to persuade the majority to someone else, WE NEED TO LYNCH ONE OF THEM TODAY IF AT ALL POSSIBLE!

I agree with this, much as I don't like it.
I don't think havingfitz is scum.

Unvote
Vote Nacho

At this point there were 3 days left and then there was even an extension. So what happened to the "We should vote who we want to vote"? Every one of your votes are terrible. You don't try to make a solid case, you don't pressure the person you're voting and you don't really try to get your suspect wagoned. And then it turns out that the whole time you really wanted Voided wagoned. And yet you never voted her when there was plenty of time to get a wagon going if you were so sure she was scum, or even brought up much against her in the first place to try to keep momentum on her original wagon. Here's the post where you finally voted her (in spite of your supposed surety she was scum because of her claim):

If there's renewed interest in a voided wagon I'm totally up for that. I particularly like his recent appeal to newbieness- that's a last resort if I've ever heard one. The neighbor-neighborizor bit, as I've said and said, would be enough to lynch him.
Besides, the deadline's been extended.

Unvote
Vote: voided

So I agree with Mike that if you thought voided was scum all along because of her claim, it makes no sense that you dropped her entirely the way you did. And your "well, it didn't look like the wagon was going to happen" looks pretty weak when she ended up lynched yesterday. Your hesitancy to actively push a wagon and really be the driving force between getting someone lynched looks terriscummy.

So here's the nutshell of your response that you want us to think should make the whole point against you go away:

There are a few people in this game with satisfactory reasons for a lynch. You seem to be saying that once someone commits a bad scumtell, every subsequent post and vote of mine should be devoted to lynching them. I don't think that's useful.
Wagons lead to reactions. Voided had his wagon, and I didn't think there was any interest for a future one. I tried to start one on andrew. Since we're so close to lynching, though, I figure lynching voided is far superior to lynching the other two.
And yes, I did forget about voided somewhat, but I guess I got bored with [her] and wanted to stir the pot.

If you really thought she was scum and thought the claim was from certain scum, you wouldn't forget about her. Only scum forgets what their reads are supposed to be. And as for the "every subsequent post should be devoted to lynching them" somewhere in the middle would be nice. All you do is "stir the pot" with a

very

small spoon, and it's the equivalent of laying low. I'm not saying you have to tunnel, but you should make SOME kind of effort to actually get your suspects wagoned instead of just hanging out and waiting for others to do the work (and therefore be targeted with the suspicion) and waiting to put your vote on the biggest wagon. This is what you did, and it's scummy.

[P.T. Barnum]

1. I have no strong opinion of you; I hate your arguments, but defending myself has cost me a chance to reread the game and get a sense of whether Idiotking was scum. I do think that comment in your first post was scummy, but you're overreacting badly.
2. You never quoted my original response to mike. Why?
3. Several people asked me who I would vote for out of pappums/fitz. That's why I said I'd prefer pappums in that post. Are you really that determined to take my comments out of context?
4. As I said to mike, I preferred a lynch on somebody as opposed to a lynch on nobody. I had a strong belief that fitz was town, so I voted pappums. I did not want a "voided wagon the whole time." I wanted a Xalxe wagon, then I reread the game and wanted a Pine wagon (Xalxe's replacement) and an andrew wagon. Voided was #3 or so on my scumlist (I don't keep one officially), and was so throughout the day. I would have liked a lynch on him. I would have especially liked a lynch on pine or andrew. I would have easily taken voided over pappums, and I did. The voided wagon was a surprise to me and everyone else.
5. I wanted to be the driving force on several wagons that day. Nobody joined them. I'm sorry I can't be as persuasive as you would like me to be. I thought my cases were thorough and well-thought out. Perhaps I could be more verbose for you?
6. Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that I was sure voided was scum. I said there was enough to lynch her (and several others). Those are very different statements, especially on day one. You and mike seem to share that inexplicable confusion.
7. Waiting to put my vote on the biggest wagon? Baloney! At

no time

did I vote for the biggest wagon while it was the biggest wagon, except for voided at the start of the game, and pappums when it looked like we weren't getting a lynch.

If you really believe that's a genuine description of the pappums and voided wagons and my participation on them, you didn't read the game fully. I'm beginning to believe it's willful ignorance.

[tarsonisocelot]

You still seem to think that answering a players questions == avoiding that player. Why does that seem odd to me?

If I had to guess, it's because you're desperately looking for a reason to be suspicious of me.

Really? You think the only reason someone would find this odd is because they were attempting to find a reason to be suspicious of you

Can you please quote where you answered pine's questions? I'm not referring to any question he asked you so I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm talking about where he accused you of waffling and told you to vote and you ignored him. You say that you explained your post better as a response to him, but that's not how you would've responded if you were town who was getting a stronger and stronger scum read on him. It IS how you'd respond to avoid interacting too much with a scum buddy.

I don't think you should be today's lynch, as much of my suspicion of you relies on Pine being scum. I'll come back to you after he flips scum. (Or if Pine flips scum and I get NK'd tonight the rest of you better revisit the pine-TO connection since it's pretty glaring.)

As there is no connection then I don't see how it could be glaring.

The question was:

Were you planning on voting, or just waffling?

as you well know given you paraphrased it in your first wall.
My response was not particularly concise, and answered both Pine and Neil at the same time (because they posted similar things) - I was trying to explain that my previous post was an attempt at understanding and laying down my plan to respond to the main wagons. It clearly said that I was not voting at the time for the 2 main wagons as I didn't want them at L-1 at that time. I decided a day later(real time) that I found Pine suspicious enough to declare it with a vote, giving other townies a chance to see my thoughts for the couple of days between that post and the time that I was hoping to be awake and with enough free time to reread fitz vs rat. Link below.
viewtopic.php?p=2924414#p2924414


It would take a lot of counter-evidence for me to believe anyone but Pine should be today's lynch. I will spend today trying to work out who should be lynched tomorrow.

[tarsonisocelot]

Important question: How likely is it that there is a roleblocker in the mafia in this type of game?

[chkflip]

Pine is L-1

, right? That's pretty fast. Still reading, will have something to say shortly.

[tarsonisocelot]

Pine is L-1

, right? That's pretty fast. Still reading, will have something to say shortly.

No, Fitz unvoted.

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.

So do I. I was explaining the reasoning behind voting to L-1 at that stage - any person to hammer this quickly would have been confirmed scum even when Pine flipped scum. (Or even more so in the highly unlikely event that he is town.) So scum couldn't hammer without basically revealing, meaning we would get time for more discussion.

[Cecily]

So I definitely agree with a pine lynch for today. Not yet, but inevitably it will and should happen and theres not much I can say to add to a case against him. So I'll move on to TO and PT. I don't believe TO to be scum. What setael has been saying about the lack of acknowledgement of Pine's case doesn't call her out as scum to me, but rather that she just kind of overlooked it. Her first vote was on Pine and while I can see that as a distancing technique it seems unlikely that someone of her experience would pull such a maneuver. And now with some attack on her she's doing a decent job of not overreacting like most inexperienced scum would. And upon ISOing PT he doesn't seem quite as scummy as I had thought when first reading this. Sorry this post didn't add much to the arguments, but it's late and I'm tired.

I'll come back through with a careful read of people tomorrow hopefully.

[chkflip]

VOTE: P.T. Barnum

[mikemike778]

You would rather not lynch than lynch your number four suspect? These objections can't be serious.

Yes they are serious.

When did I mention not lynching ? There were 3 days left - like I said I would not want to put somoene I did not think was scum 9 (you've admitted he wasn't even your 4th pick) at L1 as the Voided lynch proved there was plenty of time to get someone you

did

think was scum a wagon built up. Sure come the deadline or very close to the deadline then I'd switch to avoid a no lynch but it was way too early for this.

Don't see how we can't lynch Pine today but there's a clutch of candidates for a D3 lynch in my book - yourself, Fitz and Ces.

[Nachomamma8]

Goddamnit. I've got to learn to stick with my first instincts in this game, and not get swayed at the last minute.

VOTE: Nachomamma8

You're stuck with PR's legacy and massive scum pings. Add on top of that the fact that he nearly succeeded in getting a Townie mislynched, and you helped finish the job, this vote IS NOT MOVING without a compelling reason.

Right. So you're blaming me for "finishing the mislynch of a townie" when you're the one who hammered instead of providing that town case you promised? Here, why don't you do that, so we know it wasn't just a load of bullshit. Also, answer Voided's question. You never got around to it.

Intent to hammer here. But, for now,

Vote: Ceily

What makes you think Pine is scum?

[mikemike778]

Hey Nacho ... now you are here are you going to provide evidence of your meta on Fitz yet (ie game number, link ) ... I've asked you twice so far and you've ignored it twice ... I hope you've not been making it up

[Rhinox]

Votecount 2.1

chkflip (0) -
Pine (4) - Setael, P.T. Barnum, mikemike778, tarsonisocelot
neil1113 (1) - Bub Bidderskins
P.T. Barnum (1) - chkflip
Bub Bidderskins (0) -
mikemike778 (0) -
Setael (0) -
tarsonisocelot (1) - neil1113
Cecily (1) - Nachomamma8
havingfitz (0) -
Nachomamma8 (1) - Pine

not voting (2): Cecily, havingfitz

With 11 alive, it takes 6 to lynch.
Deadline for Day 1 is

Friday, April 22nd at 11:59PM EST

.

[Cecily]

The main reason I believe Pine is scum is because of his quick hammer D-1. Even if voided had been scum, any information that he could have given up before his lynch would have been helpful, at least in determining who he didn't want to be lynched (ie. scum). The fact that Pine went against everything he said he was going to do initially and hammered before voided had his chance to speak is very anti-town. Any town player would have allowed voided to have a last word, especially because he was in fact town. And not wanting someone to self lynch is stupid, especially because we had a little while longer before the day would have been forced to end. If anything Pine could have waited another few hours for voided to get one last post in like he had requested, but no. Pine hammered. That is why I believe he is scum.

What I was trying to do last (real) night was read through and see who was avoiding confronting or questioning Pine and because I was very tired I may have missed a few things, but I started my previous post with the intention of calling out PT. After my read through I no longer had a strong case against him and so instead of not posting and waiting until I was more alert which probably would have been the better option I posted something unhelpful and rambling. My apologies. I still don't have the time I'd like to look through for a possible D-3 candidate, but since we still have a while left in this day and the pine lynch seems pretty secure I don't think I need to rush into it just yet.

[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.

[P.T. Barnum]

Sure come the deadline or very close to the deadline then I'd switch to avoid a no lynch but it was way too early for this.

Nobody anticipated the voided wagon. If you had asked anyone in the town at the time of my vote who they thought was headed for the scaffold that day, they would have said fitz or pappums without question. You are right that I was wrong to vote that early, but the fact that no one had an issue with my vote until today shows that it was appropriate to move to those bandwagons. And I switched when I saw a better wagon build. I can't see the issue here.

[Nachomamma8]

Present for mike: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 53&t=13466
Sorry, night made me forget.

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.

Cecily, you leave me waiting with bated breath.

[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.