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

[Bulvious]

Additionally, with 3 and 7, obviously I didn't respond. I'm also clearly still not sold on Workdawg. I'd much rather see one of my preferred people go.

[Bulvious]

I think assuming intent is sort of scummy.

I just sat down to take... I'll stop there. Point is, this statement was stupid, probably the least intelligent thing I've said in mafia. The point of mafia is to discern the intent behind others actions. So, when I say "assuming intent" is scummy, I don't mean "trying to figure it out " or "Weighing" it. I mean, for me, I figure, which is more likely, right? To me, it looks as though you discern that those are his intentions because it fits with what you're saying, not because it's more likely. Disregarding a pretty important word in a post based on assumption is NOT good to do, in my opinion.

[h3ll0]

@h3ll0

That seemed a bit obvious, really. Fatso asked to replace out, and to begin with he appeared noobtown which chkflip all but conceded prior to his post where he unvoted. More specific answers wouldn't necessarily be bad.

I don't know about you, but how much of Fatso's action can be attributed to newbieness? I can't see how you can simply wipe out everything he did simply by saying "he's new". Second, Why are you answering a question that is clearly directed at chkflip? I admit, I should have ask specifically for him to reply, but isn't it obvious? Seeing how I was asking for his justification?

I'd prefer an Alnpka lynch, but if we need a compromise lynch we need to come to some sort of agreement somewhat quickly. Maybe it's wrong of me to rush people but when some people only make a post a day if that (most do about that) then we definitely need to hold the deadline in mind.

-Snip-

My overall vibe on him: He's either bad town or he's scum, either way I feel like he's not very useful in the game. I'm definitely the most comfortable lynching him.

Looks like Fatso to me. I don't get how you can dismiss Fatso as noobtown (especially since Fatso is the one with 3 games here), while thinking that Alnpka (who is playing his first game here). Furthermore, while Alnpka has used his vote to some effect, Fatso has not. Fatso's replacement, Kard, has also not done anything significant enough to be clear off as town.

[Workdawg]

WTF, do you have some sort of timer to automatically put up posts at the exact same time as I do? Weird that it's happened twice in a row... anyway.

Bullet Points Against Dawg

• 1. Bases his reads off of activity
  
• 2. Takes no real stand on anything, as to avoid angering anyone
  
• 3. OMGUS'd me(semi)
  
• 4. Uses IIoA to fill walls
  
• 5. Thinks like sucm
  
• 6. Attacked me for not posting enough, called me scummy for it
  
• 7. Mis-reps
  
• 8. Either-or-Fallacies

1. No, I have not done this. My reads on Zd, Fatso and alnpka are all based on their play. I have not given a read on you or said you were scummy at all. My analysis of your activity was simply to point out that, up until now, you hadn't contributed anything to the game at all. I would rather lynch someone who had contributed nothing than no-lynch and end up with 8 players in the game trying to fight the uphill battle of an even number of players on D2. In your further post (373) you blatantly misrep me by saying that my only to lynch options are lurkers. My first choice is very clear if you've read the thread.

I have commented on a willingness to lynch other people based on activity because, at this point, it seems like a real possibility that we will be faced with either no-lynch or a compromise of some kind; and to say it will never come down to this is wrong. I cannot control 8 other peoples votes. It's not whether there are gameplay-based reasons to vote for a lurker, because as you said, it's unlikely we will have given a good reason to. It's whether lynching a lurker is better than the alternative, which if the alternative is a no-lynch, then I would say a lurker is the better option.

2. The only thing I'm fairly certain of so far is that Zd seems very much like scum to me. Other than that, I support lynching a lurker if it comes down to a choice between that or no-lynch. Show me where I said "xxx is scum because they are not posting.

3. I did not OMGUS you. I said I would be willing to policy lynch you as a lurker before you even posted you case against me, TWICE. You can argue that I'm OMGUSing you because of your one post where you gave your first impressions, but that had nothing to do with it. You posted that on Friday, and then you didn't bother to actually post up your reason (one of many, it seems) until Monday. IIRC, my first post expressing my willingness to lynch you was before you posted that first "scum tell." (thread review confirms this, post 341 vs post 343)

4. I guess I'll address your list of "IIoA quotes" (from your post 373).
The first two are defending myself against Zd. He continuously misinterprets (or mis-represents) things I've said, so I chose to explain what I was talking about rather than just let him, and anyone else, think I'm scum because he misreads my posts.
The third quote is simply me mimicking his "case recap" in post 358. It's in the exact same format as what he posted. Does that make me scum, for copying him, or does it mean he's also scum because he used "IIoA" in his case against me... or is it neither, or both?
What else am I supposed to do when he blatantly misreps me; I can't just let it slide and have him and others believe these terrible misinterpretations. I'm not using "IIoA" to fill my cases, only to defend myself because his entire case against me was misreps.

5. I don't see many mentions of this in your case against me other than the "Where is the rest of your case, shotty?" quote from my post 357. It makes sense that scum would want to make sure they aren't found out this late in the day, but the timing I think will prove that this is not any sort of scum-slip. Just got back and read post 341-357. 341 is a general overview of my thoughts, so a good starting point, Then you posted your "case" against me. I addressed your case and that was pretty much the only thing that had been discussed between the two posts. There wasn't much else to comment on. So I was simply curious what more there was that had convinced you so much that I was scum. Aside from all of that. I was actually trying to get you to actually post some more seeing as your first 7 posts (out of a total of 11 now) had still provided almost no content. With the deadline approaching, I needed more information to get a read on you and decide if you would make a good lurker lynch or not.

6. I did call you out for not posting enough, see above, but I never called you scum for it. Once again, I only said I would support lynching you as a lurker option due to your previous lack of content. You are misreping me...

7. I'll give you the one quote where I asked Zd about his thoughts on sheeping, but that was really more of a passive-aggressive jab than anything. I don't recall mis-representing anyone else, certainly not on purpose... Others have certainly done it more than me. To steal a line from Zd: Quotes or it didn't happen.

8. I addressed this in the first point, if you have more examples of these EO fallacies, please provide them.

Other thoughts

My comments on voting alnpka.

It's true that it's a bad reason to not want to vote for him, but I still get a newb read on him and if it came down to the choice between someone providing ZERO content (shotty, at the time) or someone who was at least trying (alnpka), then I would prefer to lynch the person who hadn't contributed at all. I understand that giving him a chance because he's a newb is a weak reason, but I'm not talking about not lynching him when there is a GOOD reason to, I'm just talking about not lynching him if there's NOT a good reason to and there are better options, IMO.

On the other players lack of posting.

It's true that many other players, chkflip, h3ll0, ST, and even Kard now have been posting less frequently than before, but at least they have all posted content. Up until very recently, shotty had been far-and-away the most unproductive player in this game. FWIW, with shotty's recent activity though, I would not support a lurker lynch against him; despite his tunneling one me. As I've said, I welcome the pressure considering sarahfish's bad start... though I would hope that I have proven that it was the player, not the slot in this case.
Note: Right under the pages buttons in the lower right corner of the page is an "Activity Overview" link... it shows the last time every player has posted in the thread.

Shotty

When you first posted up your suspects, you said reasons (a plural indicates more than one, where I am from), yet you posted a single, weak reason. What happened to the rest of your reasons? I see you posted a nice, pretty colored wall against me, but that's ALL stuff I posted after your original comment. Didn't you have more reasons from before? Maybe my more recent post just supplied you with some extra juicy tidbits?

[Bulvious]

@h3llo

did kinda sort of justify it. Was providing my observation and I don't see the matter with that.

And yeah. I had no idea it was his third game. But aren't his othdr two games still active? Someone said before that it was his third game but up until that point I had no idea.

[Zdenek]

Are you saying that sheeping is a rock solid scum-tell, Zd?

No.

Anyway, there clearly isn't the support for a WD lynch today, and we need to get one so

Unvote
Vote Alnkpa

[Kard]

Sorry about not posting yesterday, didn't get home for a while and had lots of homework, aah, the joy of being in school : |

Looks like Fatso to me. I don't get how you can dismiss Fatso as noobtown (especially since Fatso is the one with 3 games here), while thinking that Alnpka (who is playing his first game here). Furthermore, while Alnpka has used his vote to some effect, Fatso has not. Fatso's replacement, Kard, has also not done anything significant enough to be clear off as town.

Honestly, at this point, there's really not much of significance I can do, I've voiced my opinion, and I feel like if I comment on other people, I might just be saying what's already been said before, and where would that get us? I will voice what i think if I notice something new.

Noticed Zd voted Aln, what do you think the chances of him just bandwagoning are? Anyone can feel free to answer.

[chkflip]

OMG the worst stomach flu. Catching up.

[Antihero]

Vote Count #14

alnkpa - 3 (Bulvious, Kard, Zdenek)
Bulvious - 1 (startransmission)
Kard - 1 (h3ll0)
Workdawg - 1 (drmyshottyizsik)
Zdenek - 2 (Workdawg, alnkpa)

Not Voting: chkflip

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch. Deadline is April 15th.

[drmyshottyizsik]

alnkpa is semi-scummy, but still.... workdawg is sooooo scummy!

[Bulvious]

Kard, you could do some hunting, how about? Ask questions, make observations on gameplay. Don't sit passively and watch everyone make cases and do the hunting. That's scummy.

As far as Zd bandwagoning, perhaps, since you're the person asking the question - what's your own opinion on it? Clearly you think it's a possibility.


Drmy, I still don't totally see it, sorry mate.

[Bulvious]

Additionally, Chkflip, catch up fast please!

[Kard]

TBH, I think it's a bit strange his only reason for lynching Aln is "we need one"

@Zd, why is that your only reason? Bulvious has listed numerous reasons. Not only that, but you still have time to convince everyone else that WD is scummy as you believe, so why did you give up now?

[chkflip]

Kard/Work still seems like a viable scumpair IMO.

The Alnwagon is garbage as far as I'm concerned. There's not a good reason amongst the votes that I can spot with great certainty.

I'd like to hear more from startransmission. A lot more. About everything.

Don't like Zd's last vote in the slightest.

VOTE: Zdenek

[Zdenek]

Kard, we have one day to get to a lynch. If there was more support for a workdawg lynch, I'd have left my vote there, but I've been pushing that since we got the extension, and I am not seeing the necessary support for it, and I am not having my vote somewhere useless this close to the deadline. Also, this is not the first time I've mentioned him, and I've thought that he's been scummy for awhile, see my ISO 17 for instance. Also it is very detrimental for town to no lynch on the first day.

chkflip, what exactly was wrong with my vote? If you think WD is scummy, I'll happily get back on that wagon, but without the support for it, with one day before the deadline, I do not see any point in letting my vote just sit there.

[Workdawg]

Wow, some interesting stuff going on here since yesterday morning. I was really busy last night so I didn't get a chance to check in.

We are REALLY close to the deadline now, so it's time for people to step up and really increase activity (h3ll0, ST). We don't have a consensus yet and we need everyone on board to make sure we lynch the right person.

@Kard

- It doesn't matter if you are parroting things other people have said. The things you agree with, put them in your own words and tell us why. The things you don't agree with, tell us why you don't also. The way you're playing right now looks very much like you're just trying to fly under the radar and avoid committing to anything.

@chkflip

- Sorry to hear you were sick, bad timing... but at least you're back now. I agree that there isn't a GOOD reason to lynch alnpka today, but his play has been lacking and, like I said, I wouldn't be opposed to lynching him if it comes down to the deadline and we NEED a lynch.

Right now it looks like Zd and alnpka are tied at L-2 a piece. I've always said I thought Zd was our scum, so I'm obviously not going to move my vote right now. I'll try and compile my case against Zd during work if I get the chance and post it up, otherwise tonight for sure.

@MOD: Could we maybe get a mass prod out to try and get everyone in here for our last day of deliberation?
Also, what TIME is our deadline?

[h3ll0]

@h3llo
And yeah. I had no idea it was his third game. But aren't his othdr two games still active? Someone said before that it was his third game but up until that point I had no idea.

Fatso's games have already ended. To be fair, he replaced out of his second game pretty early, but still, you considered him to be more newbie than alnpka after knowing that Fatso had played more games than alnpka?

[h3ll0]

Don't like Zd's last vote in the slightest.

Why? Do you find that jumping on wagons when we are nearing the deadline to be scummy?

I'm not sold on the alpnka wagon, like I said earlier, as the way I see it, what he did was in no way scummier than what Fatso/Kard did. Most of the points that Bulvious put up against alpnka can also be applied for Fatso/Kard.

Right now it looks like Zd and alnpka are tied at L-2 a piece. I've always said I thought Zd was our scum, so I'm obviously not going to move my vote right now. I'll try and compile my case against Zd during work if I get the chance and post it up, otherwise tonight for sure.

There is something about this post that makes me want to

Unvote, Vote Workdawg

. It feels as though you want to sideline the fact that you are the third biggest wagon, if counting the intend to vote.

[Zdenek]

Unvote
Vote Workdawg

[drmyshottyizsik]

So chick is liable to put him at L-1 and this close to dead line a hammer will most likely happen. It's claim time I think.

[Workdawg]

Right now it looks like Zd and alnpka are tied at L-2 a piece. I've always said I thought Zd was our scum, so I'm obviously not going to move my vote right now. I'll try and compile my case against Zd during work if I get the chance and post it up, otherwise tonight for sure.

There is something about this post that makes me want to

Unvote, Vote Workdawg

. It feels as though you want to sideline the fact that you are the third biggest wagon, if counting the intend to vote.

I'm not really sure how you got to that, I just looked at the votecount and saw that aln and Zd were both at L-2. I guess if you want to mix it up again that's fine. Do you have a case against me this time, or is my comment just making you uneasy? As far as I can tell, you've never voiced suspicion against me before.

[alnkpa]

So chick is liable to put him at L-1 and this close to dead line a hammer will most likely happen. It's claim time I think.

It's L-2. I will catch up until 20:00 +2GMT so just wait for me. If you want I can explain my V/LA.

[Workdawg]

My case against Zd

He doesn’t like to post cases against people unless he has to. He accuses me (incorrectly) of taking wishy-washy stances, when the entire beginning of the game he did his best to avoid taking a stance on anyone.

ST

His initial vote on ST is for active lurking. He later comments that he doesn’t seem the point in making a case for his vote because we are able to read his ISO ourselves. He’s essentially asking us to do the work for him. A convenient way to place a vote for a scummy action, without actually pointing out that action. Everyone is going to read things differently, and it seems scummy to me to ask everyone else to make his case for him. If I read the case and point out specific things that I find scummy, he can simply hop in and say “That’s exactly what I’m talking about.” He doesn’t have to actually even make a case against someone this way. As opposed to sheeping, I’d call this sheep herding… trying to get others to make a case for him so that he can sheep them but seem like he is leading instead.

h3ll0

His initial vote on h3ll0 is “Partly because of process of elimination.” When he is pressed about what he means by this, he gives the lurkers a pass because they aren’t responding to pressure, so it’s worthless to pressure them. He gives Fatso, Sarah and alnpka newb/newbtown reads. That leaves Bulvious (whom he doesn’t comment on at all), ST and h3ll0. He says that it wouldn’t be “fruitful” to push a lynch on ST because he doesn’t think we’d lynch the IC. Thus, that leaves h3ll0, and again his only comment on h3ll0 is that “he’s scummy to boot.” Interestingly, he doesn’t even really say anything about h3ll0 being scummy other than his supposed “buddying” with Bulvious. That’s the ONLY thing he says about h3ll0 before his vote, and after it they have a disagreement about the lynching questions, he falsely claims h3ll0 misrep’s him about Lynchking (yes, falsely. Zd said he would lean town on Lynchking BECAUSE OF A POTENTIAL SCUMSLIP in ISO 10.) h3ll0 also accuses him of Fence-sitting, which he claims is a misrep as well. After this point, they go back and forth a little bit, but there still really isn’t any case here. Just many disagreements about various things.

Me

So his first two suspects he’s been reluctant to post his case on, and then he hops on me. As we’ve been going back and forth for the past days, my thoughts on this are all over the thread. He starts off claiming that I’m just trying to “get my foot in the door on lynches” (despite the fact that I’ve only ever voted for him) He’s straight up misquoted me to make things I’ve said look scummy when they were not. When I called him out on this, he claims he left parts off of the quote to show I agreed with the lynches.

So he ADMITS to misquoting me (ISO 23) to show that I said something I did not say. He claims he did this because leaving the quotes intact makes me appear wishy-washy, which he then claims is the main reason I’m scum. So, wait… what he’s said then is that he misquoted me to show that I agreed with the lynches, and that IF he had quoted me properly it would make me appear MORE like scum because that shows that I’m wishy-washy.

WAT?

So what’s the motivation to misquote if quoting me directly makes me seem more scummy? There is none, unless… he was back pedaling because I called him out on the misquotes and he’s trying to justify it. He failed miserably.

Even after I point out how he has misrepresented me in EVERYTHING he pointed out, he still sticks to his guns… it’s almost like he’s not even reading my replies. FFS, after I disputed it all, he simply went back to the same four quotes he started with and tried to explain AGAIN why they were scummy. This time he used the entire quote at least though. He continues to misconstrue my quotes even though I already clarified what I said.

I refuted Shotty’s case against me and he has nothing to say about that other than he still thinks I’m “sooo scummy”?

(RANDOM CONJECTURE FOLLOWS)
Zd’s vote is a bit suspicious to me as well. He did say that he would do it, but I think it’s a bit premature to be hopping around. IMO, he saw that I also defended myself well against shotty’s case and decided it wasn’t going to work pushing for a mislynch against me today. I think he felt like if he had shotty on his side they could make it work, but when he saw that fail, he realized he’d better get in on alnpka while the getting is good. I wonder if Zd and shotty are our scumteam. They seem to have similar styles in that they both like to post as little information as possible and misrepresent things I’ve said to make me look like scum.

Final thoughts

Like I said before, we really need others to step up here. If we haven’t heard from you in a while, get your ass in here and chime in on our top wagons. Both pros and cons.
If I’m counting correctly, that’s both me and Zd at L-2 currently. (and chkflip said he thought I might be scum also, since h3ll0 wants to count “intent to vote” also, which would put me at L-1)

[Bulvious]

@h3ll0 guess so. (in reply to the fat more newb than aln)

Workdawg, make a claim.

I have no case against either Zd or Work but I can see the validities in both sides of the argument. Ill change my vote tonight if it comes down to those two.

[chkflip]

WORKDAWG IS L-1

I'm unsure if a Workdawg claim would make a difference at this point. If he's a powerrole, he's more than likely dead N1.