Succession Mafia II: OVER!

[Kinetic]

BTW: DGB's power was to test people who were recruited at a particular location, but it is only useful on even nights. The fact that she "changed it" means she is lying for some reason.

[ThAdmiral]

1) Which is my point. [Putting forth something and saying it doesn't imply anything] is like pushing the spotlight on me, without putting forth a case in which you believe I am scum (your vote on me is, I agree with the wagon, which is just Ludi voting for reasons for yesterday)

I spent a good 20-odd minutes doing that research, I wasn't going to then not mention the findings.

2) Again, that's wishy-washy. Scummy is indictive, well scum and stupid is indictive of town.

To make it clear what I was saying: I think your actions were scummy. Full stop. If you happen to be town though, which I allow for the possibility of, your actions were stupid.

I still believe your vote on me is very weak. You give no reasons except you agree with the wagon (what wagon, and what parts of it, spelled out, do you agree with?). I also believe that you've been doing this all game, IIRC. You don't really take too many stands. The whole top 3 scum list thing made you look like you are contributing, but you actually weren't (and were called out on it by Tajo? I believe).

Hold on, YOU are criticising ME for my top 3 scum list? That's just too rich, WAY too rich, coming from the guy whose most notable action during day one (other than refusing to put down a vote that could have affected the game at all) was putting up COMPLETELY ARBITRARY lists of people's posting rates! At least my lists had the intention of getting people to come to some sort of consensus in a game which was languishing in no-lynch territory.

As for my case against you: you were one of my top 3 candidates on day one as I believe you would be a good recruitment target, and your actions have not made me think otherwise.

[ThAdmiral]

VOTE: ThAdmiral

Yesterday's reasons plus Battousai's reasons plus he seems to be trying too hard to be friendly:

Also I might as well say that I was blocked last night. Apparently I didn't go out on to the streets because of fear of violence. My character is such a coward!

1. How am I trying to be friendly?
2. Why is being friendly a scumtell anyway?

[Tanarin]

@chaz: I dunno why you are voting DGB, after re-reading her, he is just being eccentric, but not scummy.

@Sera "track": I would like to know why you think he is scum? From where I am standing, I don't remember Yos claiming he did NOT have an action. SO it is rather odd that you decided to ask who he targetted.

[Porochaz]

She and going by my self made rule of yesterday of disagreeing with everything you say has made me feel better with my vote.

[Magister Ludi]

Actually,

Unvote
Vote DGB

~~~~
I also need an answer from Seraphim in his next post about my previous question (concerning Yos). I know I am repeating myself, but this is exceedingly important.

[Yosarian2]

Is the case against Yos that he targetted someone last night therefore he must be scum? Admittedly his defense is a bit shit what with the soft-claiming unrecruitable, but I don't see a reason to vote him based on the fact that he targeted someone alone.

I am not softclaiming anything. I am explaining, using publicly available facts, why we don't want me to claim a specific power role today. If this is anything like the last game, some power roles will be recruitable, and some will not be, and the scum are likely to figure out which is which at some point in the game.

I an quite deliberately NOT claiming, soft or hard or anything, weather I am recruitable or not. We do not want the scum to know who is and who is not recruitable. The only way town wins this game is if scum fails at recruitment more then half of the time while we lynch correctly basically every day, So we need the scum to fail some recruitment attempts, which means we need the scum to not be sure who is recruitable and who is not.

[Herodotus]

BTW: DGB's power was to test people who were recruited at a particular location, but it is only useful on even nights. The fact that she "changed it" means she is lying for some reason.

This may as well be Proto-Uralic. What does "changed it" refer to, and what are you talking about?

She and going by my self made rule of yesterday of disagreeing with everything you say has made me feel better with my vote.

You like DGb for scum largely because Tanarin disagrees?
Do you think they are partners?

[Magister Ludi]

On DGB,

I wondered why I wasn't suspecting DGB for her play in day one, and then I realized I had no idea. She was all over the map, and I her pushes on people didn't nesessarily read at all pro-town.

The fact that her master plan was bollocks, she had an ability and apparently failed to use it (this doesn't sound anti-town at all...), and I'm not sure her reasoning behind her vote today, I am quite happy with my vote.

(plus whatever the heck Kinetic is talking about, but don't factor that into anything)

[Yosarian2]

To be fair, with most abilities, if she forgot to use it, it would hurt her side no matter if she was town or scum, so that's not really a tell either way.

I do think DGB was town day 1; I had a very strong town read on her then. Of course, that doesn't mean she's necessarily still town today, and I don't get the sudden change from being opposed to lynching me yesterday to being in favor of it today.

[Magister Ludi]

(shrug) :p

In this case its actually worse for town if town don't use their abilities. If, for example, a cop didn't use his ability, thats a huge blow to finding cult, as town is racing as fast as possible to discover who the cult are through any combination possible, roles, map, ingame play, lynching. Cult aren't to nonplussed is they forgot an ability, they know they have inevitability on their side.

I'm not as sure about her alignment day one now, obviously. Or day two especially.

[DrippingGoofball]

My plan wasn't "bollocks" - you didn't see it in action, and you know, neither did I but I believe it could have been really helpful.

I probably shouldn't bother, but Kinetic-scum's BS post above is not only wrong, contains a least 3 points that don't make internal sense or are verifiable inaccuracies.

[Mr. Flay]

Someone asked for the roles from Succession Mafia I; I didn't realize I never posted the role PMs in their entirety. In brief since it's late:

• Goon = Townie
  
• Enforcer ≈ Cop
  
• Bodyguard = Bodyguard (type 3, sorta)
  
• Moll ≈ Roleblocker
  
• Consigliere = Cult Doctor, Unrecruitable
  
• Loose Cannon = 1-shot Vigilante, Unrecruitable
  
• Son = Cult Leader

[Kinetic]

My plan wasn't "bollocks" - you didn't see it in action, and you know, neither did I but I believe it could have been really helpful.

I probably shouldn't bother, but Kinetic-scum's BS post above is not only wrong, contains a least 3 points that don't make internal sense or are verifiable inaccuracies.

I've seen your role PM DGB. I paraphrased it a bit, but that's your role. And now you're lying about it. I was planning to stop you by burning down the building that you told everyone to go to today, thus I didn't need to dissuade the town from following your plan, but now you're lying.

Why?

[Porochaz]

BTW: DGB's power was to test people who were recruited at a particular location, but it is only useful on even nights. The fact that she "changed it" means she is lying for some reason.

This may as well be Proto-Uralic. What does "changed it" refer to, and what are you talking about?

She and going by my self made rule of yesterday of disagreeing with everything you say has made me feel better with my vote.

You like DGb for scum largely because Tanarin disagrees?
Do you think they are partners?

That was a bit of a jump. No I don't Tanarin has nothing to do with me thinking DGB is scum. The fact she has done very little pro town things makes her scum.

[DrippingGoofball]

I've seen your role PM DGB. I paraphrased it a bit, but that's your role. And now you're lying about it. I was planning to stop you by burning down the building that you told everyone to go to today, thus I didn't need to dissuade the town from following your plan, but now you're lying.

Why?

Gawd. I see you're taunting me, you filthy scumbag. Must resist urge to throttle lunatic cult member.

[bvoigt]

@Porochaz and Ludi: Why are you voting DGB?

@Kinetic: So you recruited her?

[xvart]

I'm thoroughly disappointed in the number of people alive today. I'll be back later once my conference finishes check in.

[Mr. Flay]

First Vote Count of Day Two:

Yosarian2 - 4 (populartajo, DrippingGoofball, Katsuki, Fritzler)
ThAdmiral- 2 (Battousai, Cobblerfone)
DrippingGoofball - 2 (Porochaz, Magister Ludi)
Battousai- 1 (ThAdmiral)
Cobblerfone - 1 (bvoigt)
populartajo - 1 (Yosarian2)

Not Voting: Andrius, Bunnylover, Flameaxe, Herodotus, Lady Lambdadelta, Nobody Special, ooba, Seraphim, springlullaby, Tanarin, xvart, Zdenek

With 23 voters, it will take 12 to lynch.

[Battousai]

DGB- At least ABR has the good sense not to taunt you while he is in throttling range

ThAd- What actions do you think were scummy? Just being vague like that makes it so I can’t defend myself.

Since I’m going down this route, might as well go all the way and do a D1 ISO reading of ThAd.

0- confirm
1- fluff “who would I recruit”

2- soft defense of Ludi
3- harder defense of Ludi

4- Fluff

5- Votes me for making “wild claims” on Ludi

6- Wants people not to ignore recruiters
7-8- fluff

9- votes xvart as he is as good as any

10- reason for voting xvart is because he has most votes
11- fluff/recruitment WIFOM (abr could do this, that, or act illogically)
12-14- fluff
15- fluff/ ”if I was recruited I’d be active”
16- defends Dgb being recruitable D1/ cobbler too scummy to be scum
17- fluff/ repeat cobbler ISO 16
18- defends cobbler- too scummy to be scum, too VI to be recruited/fluff
19-20 top 3 list
21-22 top 3 list fluff
23- fluff
24-30- top 3 list fluff
31-33- fluff
34- defends RG’s inactivity as sitewide
35-38 top 3 list fluff

39- defends list/fluff/defends shitty xvart wagon (he’s a sexy recruit choice)/says list is for him, but is still voting xvart

40- fluff

41- has to strong convictions on anyone, says cult is too WIFOMy to pin down

42-43- fluff
44- fluff/defends lynching

45- Is upset xvart is waiting until now to defend himself, now that there is little other options, though claims he doesn't understand what his defense is

46-47- fluff

48- defends not unvoting xvart earlier

49- fluff

ISO 2,3,5 reads to me that you thought Ludi was town, therefore I was scum for attacking her

ISO 9, 39, 45, 48 is basically you voted xvart for being the leading wagon, then changed it later to being a decent recruit choice, then when the vote count was at 7 xvart, 6 yos, 4 chrono you decide that xvart is defending himself. You go from the leading wagon to the smallest wagon that has a chance to go to lynch (you can't be called out for wasted vote). That effectively put you early enough to be near the middle of a wagon, get off a leading wagon near deadline, and still appear to be active even though all your posts at the time were fluff

ISO 41, along with votes on chrono and xvart is just that you wanted too lynch anyone, regardless of whether you thought they were scum. I think that is scummy as hell. Apparently I live alone in an alternate universe in which scum do not want to mislynch (must resist urge to get in debate on this. Must save for postgame).

At the beginning of the game (the less dangerous time) you start off just defending people, then you post fluff and recruit WIFOM and then defend people again, then wind up just posting fluff on your top 3 list and just plain fluff till deadline.

[Battousai]

Forgot to add that flay said players would be killed before they are recruited in the action resolution. Therefore we don't know if the vig prevented a recruitment or not (but at least we can take solace in the fact that we won't change alignment and then die in the same night).

[Cobblerfone]

1. How am I trying to be friendly?
2. Why is being friendly a scumtell anyway?

If it's a part of your general meta or something that comes with being here for years, that's fine, it still doesn't remove the other things that make you scummy. It is an addtional reason that hasn't been pointed out and that I've seen in other games. It wasn't just today either. It's not "being friendly" it's "trying too hard to be friendly." Do you know how many smilies are in your ISO? I count at least 5. Plus a woot and a "[We're at the ]1000! [post]" and lots of exclamation marks and fluff like Battousai said. It's not something that's scummy by itself, and I wouldn't base a vote on it alone. But it does make me more comfortable with my vote.

[Magister Ludi]

bvoigt, check my last couple of posts. I explained it there.

(Also batt, I'm not a 'her')

[xvart]

Katsuki, who do you think was recruited last night?

If they wern't already, I can see Ooba and yourself being said recruits.

Vote: YOS

Wait... wait... what? You imply that Yos2 and ooba may have already been recruited, and if they weren't, they were recruited last night? Yet you are voting for Yos2? Why do you think ooba may have been recruited already?

ARE YOU LIKE SERIOUSLY SUGGESTING CONFIRMED POWER ROLE = CONFIRMED TOWN?

Obviously, it also doesn't mean confirmed cult, either.

That stupid ordered list totally ruined my plan. Notice how I didn't mention it again after that.

Could your scheme work by modifying it (removing people at the top of the list or above a certain number of votes)?

Well, maybe we should ask people to confirm whether or not they were at 33 (the night club/lounge) last night. (note, not were they were, just whether or not visit 33)

Since I was one of the people originally being discussed to do this I did not visit 33 last night.

[DrippingGoofball]

That stupid ordered list totally ruined my plan. Notice how I didn't mention it again after that.

Could your scheme work by modifying it (removing people at the top of the list or above a certain number of votes)?

No, because I would have eliminated the very top, the very bottom, and a chunk in the middle, leaving two peaks.